HERALDRY 



when armory arose and the knights 

 began to decorate their shields and 

 banners with distinctive symbols, 

 to avoid confusion and ensure 

 proper order being observed, the 

 heralds were appointed to look 

 after armory, register pedigrees, 

 and see that knights observed con- 

 duct becoming their dignity. In 

 England they were made into a 

 college of arms. 



Apart from the heralds who are 

 members of the college many others 

 were instituted from time to time, 

 both by the kings of England 

 and the princes. Thus a herald 

 styled Bath king of arms, who 

 does not belong to that corporation, 

 was attached to the order of the 



3946 



Bath when revived by George I, 

 and another king of arms, with no 

 distinctive appellation, is an official 

 of the order of S. Michael and S. 

 George. Heralds extraordinary, 

 who may have special functions 

 assigned to them, but who also are 

 not members of the college, are 

 occasionally appointed. Until Tudor 

 times many great nobles, such as 

 the Percys, Nevills, earls of Salis- 

 bury, and Sir John Chandos. one 

 of the original knights of the garter, 

 had their own pursuivants, named 

 after the family badge or crest, who 

 acted as the family heralds and 

 genealogists, as well as confidential 

 messengers to their masters. See 

 College of Arms. 



HERALDRY AND COATS OF ARMS 



G. C. Rothery, Author, The A.B.G. of Heraldry 



In this work there are articles on all the chief terms used in heraldry, 



e.g. Cadency; Charge; Cross; Quartering; Saltire ; Supporter. 



See Coat of Arms; College of Arms; Knighthood; Peerage; and 



articles, on Howard and other noble families 



In the strict sense of the word, 

 heraldry embraces all those duties 

 which fall within the domain of the 

 herald, and so comprises genealogy, 

 the rules of precedence and official 

 ceremonial, and the art of armory. 

 Generally, however, the term is 

 restricted to the last-named branch, 

 which is concerned with the de- 

 vices placed on shields or banners 

 as distinguishing marks of indivi- 

 duals, families, or territorial divi- 

 sions, as well as the ornaments 

 surrounding the shield. 



Heraldry as a science, resting on 

 hereditary descent of such de- 

 vices as a fundamental fact, can- 

 not be traced further back than 

 the third crusade (1139-92), 

 though there were signs of it nearly 

 a hundred years earlier, and no 

 doubt it owed a great debt to that 

 art of symbolism adopted in re- 

 mote ages and by many peoples to 

 distinguish tribes and individuals. 

 Some of the symbols or charges 

 used in heraldry are unquestion- 

 ably of extreme antiquity. Such 

 are the snake-like dragon, the 

 lion, the single and double-headed 

 eagle, the leaping dolphin, the 

 cramponed cross, the saltire, the 

 crescent and circular ring, the wavy 

 or chevronee line, as well as such 

 conventionalised floral and plant 

 forms as the cinquefoil. 



Primitive Charges and Symbols 



All these and many more may be 

 found on the coins, pottery, and 

 monuments of ancient Greece and 

 Rome, often shown as decorating 

 the shields or standards of warriors. 

 Many of these charges may be 

 traced on Assyrian monuments 

 and in the hieroglyphics of Egypt 

 (where we see them representing 

 dynasties, gods, and territorial 

 divisions), and even among savage 



races chiefs and whole tribes are 

 found using distinctive head- 

 dresses or tattoo marks. Many of 

 these symbols were totemistic, and 

 to that degree were really here- 

 ditary to a family. But in the 

 main, outside of totemism and those 

 symbols attributed to tribal or 

 local divinities, the devices found 

 in antiquity and among barbarian 

 people were personal, and do not 

 often show stability even in that 

 restricted sense. 



This want of stability character- 

 ises the early heraldry of Europe. 

 While it is extremely likely that 

 over most of Europe certain of the 

 totemistic, tribal, and territorial 

 devices subsisted well into the 

 feudal days, there is no direct 

 evidence that such were used on 

 shields, helmets, or standards. 

 What appears to have happened 

 is that knights fighting in the East 

 as Crusaders encountered foes who 

 fought under leaders bearing pecu- 

 liar devices on the armour and 

 shields, and taking decorated 

 standards into warfare. 



Symbolism was always highly 

 cultivated in the East, and it was 

 distinctly well regulated among 

 the Saracenic warriors, who may 

 have inherited the system from 

 Egypt, and by way of Syria. As 

 the armour of the Christian knights 

 became heavier and thus more 

 effective as an agency for con- 

 cealing individuality, the advan- 

 tages of these identity symbols, 

 serving as signs for rallying scat- 

 tered henchmen, became self-evi- 

 dent, and were gradually adopted. 

 It is certain that some of the best 

 known feudal coats of arms only 

 appeared towards the 13th century. 

 . No heraldic symbol of any kind 

 appeared on the great seals of 



HERALDRY 



England until the reign of Rich- 

 ard I. His first great seal has no 

 such device as three lions, but \ve 

 see on the shield borne by his 

 equestrian figure apparently a lion 

 combatant, i.e. rampant, in a 

 fighting attitude. As the shield is 

 curved, only half is shown, so 

 the vis-a-vis, if there was one, is not 

 seen. The three lions passant 

 guardant do not appear until his 

 second seal. It is true that in the 

 great seals of the earlier kings 

 only the backs, or insides, of the 

 shields are shown ; but if the out- 

 sides had borne important devices, 

 . the engravers would certainly have 

 been careful to display them. 



On the Continent the emperor 

 Frederick Barbarossa is credited 

 with fostering heraldry. In Eng- 

 land Edward I was the first to 

 appoint heralds, a lead followed 

 by Henry IV, but it was not 

 until the reign of Henry V that a 

 proclamation was issued obliging 

 knights to appeal to the king of 

 heralds before assuming armorial 

 devices. Edward III instituted 

 the court of chivalry under the 

 earl marshal, and out of its ac- 

 tivities sprang the practice of 

 visitations, or perambulating 

 courts held by heralds and pursui- 

 vants, to inquire into armorial 

 matters, issue confirmation of 

 grants, and register genealogies. 



The Court of Chivalry 

 The last of these visitations was 

 held in 1686. Such of the records 

 as still exist are very valuable. The 

 court of chivalry, or earl mar- 

 shal's court, ceased to exist in 

 1907. Its most famous achieve- 

 ment was the trial of the issue 

 between Sir Richard le Scrope and 

 Sir Robert Grosvenor, both of 

 whom claimed a golden bend on a 

 blue field. From 1385 to 1390 a 

 splendid array of English, Scot- 

 tish, and Continental chivalry ap- 

 peared to give evidence, and 

 finally Richard II delivered judge- 

 ment in favour of le Scrope. 



Although at first many of the 

 armorial devices assumed were 

 personal, as was natural from its 

 source of origin, very soon it be- 

 came in the main feudal and ter- 

 ritorial. That is to say, many of 

 the most prized coats of arms were 

 attached to fiefs. Consequently we 

 find that men of noble birth and 

 ancient lineage who became pos- 

 sessed of important fiefs by in- 

 heritance, marriage, or gift, com- 

 monly gave up their paternal arms 

 for those of the territorial dignity. 

 In many more instances they 

 were quartered or otherwise incor- 

 porated. Another peculiarity of 

 these feudal territorial arms was 

 that, with certain modifications, 

 they were assumed or granted to 



