Heraldry. 
—— 
Theories 
ascribing 
the inven- 
tion of ar- 
mories to the 
Egyptians, 
Jews, 
Greeks, 
712 
vived in all their original extent, and defended. with a 
show of learning more imposing than had ever before 
been called into their service, by a French writer of 
eminence, M. Court de Gebelin, in the 8th volume of 
his Monde Primitif. This ingenious author does not 
indeed, after the example of Mr Sylvanus Morgan, com- 
mence his treatise with a description of the armorial 
bearings of the first parents of our race. He does not 
affirm, that “‘ Abel quartered with his paternal escut- 
cheon, argent an apple vert, for his' mother Eve, who 
was an inheritrix ;’ nor mention: Joseph, as receiving 
« an honourable augmentation to his coat, in conse~ 
quence of his being invested with the family order of 
Pharaoh king of Egypt.’ But he is seduced, by his 
fondness for a very untenable theory, into absurdities 
scarcely less glaring than these, when he talks’ seriously 
of the word ingenuus, as equivalent to “ a person who 
has aright to armorial sas ;’ and refuses to per- 
eeive any difference between the personal or political 
emblems of the Greeks and Romans, and the systematic 
heraldry of the modern nations of Europe. 
3. Since, however, the subject has so lately been 
agitated by a writer of such learning and reputation, 
it may not be amiss to examine somewhat more at 
large into the merits of the case, by investigating not 
his opinion alone, but the more probable’ of all those 
theories which have been supported by the most emi- 
nent of the heraldic authors. According to many of 
these writers, the use of armorial bearings was the in- 
vention of the ancient Egyptians ; and in support of 
this opinion two passages from Diodorus Siculus are 
alleged; in the first of which it is said that « Anubis 
and Macedon, the sons of Osiris, were the first who car- 
ried in war marks of distinction, taken from certain ani« 
mals symbolic of their valour,” (Bib. Hist. lib. i.) ; and 
in the second, that “ the Egyptians, observing that their 
troops were liable'to be scattered in battle, invented cer- 
tain signs, by which they might be able to recognise each 
other. And that making use of the figures of animals 
for this purpose, such a veneration was by degrees 
conceived for these images, that the animals atustieds 
came to be considered as sacred and inviolable beings.” 
A second set of writers assert that this art took its 
rise among the Hebrews; and the Rabbins: of later 
times have been at pains to lend all their learning to 
the defence of this opinion, by blazoning; in the most 
scientific manner, the coats-of-arms of all the principal 
personages mentioned in holy writ.* The only pas- 
sage of Scripture which they seem to quote with con- 
fidence in support of their theory, is Numbers ii. 2. 
*¢ Every man of the children of Israel shall encamp by 
his own standard, with the ensign of his father’s house.” 
But the weakness of any argument derived from this 
text will be sufficiently manifest in the sequel. 
The third opinion is tuat of those who ascribe the 
first practice of heraldry to the ancient Greeks. And 
the defenders of this doctrine never fail to cite with 
great exultation those verses of the ETA EMI OHBAIS, 
in which /Eschylus describes the bucklers of the seven 
Captains of the assailing army. 
The fourth opinion is, that the practice: of using ar- 
morial bearings was never reduced to any regular sys- 
tem till Augustus instituted legionary marks of dis 
tinction, and caused these symbols to be engraved and 
painted: on the shields of his soldiers, 
HERALDRY. 
Fifthly, It is by no means:an unconimon theory, that 
Char! was the first patrom of the hera art, 
in as much as after regulating tlie dignities and offices 
of the imperial palace, and ishing the order of 
peers, he instituted certain marks of honourable dig. Cherle 
of his court ™S2s 
tinction, by which the 
might every where be recognised. It is true thatthe 
history of St Louis, by Joinville; speaks of armorial 
bearings conferred by Charlemagne’ on the Viscounts 
of Conserans, of the house of Comminges, and that 
the romances are full of thoseof Orlando, and the 
other heroes of that age: But it is fair to’ mention, 
that these authorities are equally conclusive respect. 
ing the coat-armour of: , and the knights) of 
the round table ; so that the: claims of Charl 
to the honour of this institution are: somewhat dus 
bious even by the admission of his most'strenuous ad~ 
mirers, 
A sixth party ascribe the origin of these insignia: to The crus 
the wars which the Franks carried om in the East sades, 
against the infidel possessors of the Holy Land ; and 
derive many arguments in support of their opinion 
from the ancient charters fer the foundation and en- 
dowment of monasteries. | 
Seventhly, The Italians are unanimous in’fixing the 
origin of the art in the times of the Emperor Frederic, Gibbeline 
when their country'was torn in pieces by the rival fac= 
tions of the Guelphs and Gibbelines. The Germans, % 
in the last:place, are equally zealous in pre ep eae so ’ 
to the days of Henry the Fowler; and think they have Henry ¢ 
sufficient evidence of the justice of their opinion, in the Fowler. 
accounts which have come down to us’ of the ancient 
tournaments of Germany. The truth is, that it wed 
no means an easy matter accurately to ascertain the 
gin, or trace the progress of things which derive their 
authority from:chance and the insensible influence of 
custom, rather than from reason and the positive insti- 
tutions of legislators. 
4, It is quite evident, that painted shields and mili- 
tary ensigns of some sort, are coeval with the art of war 
itself. Jews, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and Barba- 
rians, must all have made use of some tokens by which 
the warriors of the same nation might distinguish each 
other in battle: But there seems'to be little reason for 
doubting that these people were familiar with the use 
of simple devices alone, or fanciful figures, which were 
not intended either to distinguish one family from ano- 
ther, or to mark the nobility of those who bore’ them; 
So little, indeed, is their nature ascertained, that the 
same things have been taken indifferently for devices, for 
emblems, for hieroglyphics, for symbols, and for armorial 
bearings, as may easily be seen in the treatises of Pierius, 
of Minos, of Ruscelli, of Bargagli, of Vulson de la Co- 
lombiere, and of Father Caussin, who all contrive to 
twist the same facts into evident testimonies of the 
truth of the most inconsistent theories. The dove of 
the Assyrians is, according’to all the interpreters of the 
Scriptures, a figure of Semiramis. Yet this same dove 
is with Pierius a’ hieroglyphic, with Alciatus an em- 
blem, with Bargagli a device, with Caussin a symbol, 
and with M. de la Colombiere a coat of arms: —The’ers 
ror of all those who maintain the high antiquity of he+ 
raldic bearings seems to have arisen from the circum- 
stance, that a few instances have-been preserved by the 
poets and historians, in which these personal devices 
* To such a degree had these follies prevailed, that Father Menestrier complains very feelingly of the interruption whicli the medita- 
tions of pious pa must have received from the perpetual blazoning of the arms of St Gregory, St Augustine, &er on’ the 
* Comme si ’on ne pouyoit pas assez pieusement lire une priere dans ses heures sans voir le blazon du Saint pere que en 
4 ; 
prayer books. 
avoit fait usage le premier.” 
margin of 
(lec aia ge a te APS es 0 8 a 
