A Complete Guide to Heraldry Part 71

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 s.h.i.+eld, as used by the other bishops, the Bishops of Durham place a sword and a crosier in saltire behind their s.h.i.+eld 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 ta.s.sels 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. aeneas Chisholm, the present Roman Catholic Bishop of Aberdeen. I frankly admit I am unaware why the ecclesiastical hat a.s.signed to the bishop in the official matriculation of his arms has ten ta.s.sels on either side. The Continental usage would a.s.sign 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 ta.s.sels.

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 patee, 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 pa.s.sing 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 a.s.sign it to a specific origin. {606}

Pastoral staves and pa.s.sion-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 s.h.i.+eld 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}

CHAPTER x.x.xIX

ARMS OF DOMINION AND SOVEREIGNTY

Royal arms in many respects differ from ordinary armorial bearings, and it should be carefully borne in mind that they stand, not for any particular area of land, but for the intangible sovereignty vested in the rulers thereof. They are not necessarily, nor are they in fact, hereditary. They pa.s.s by conquest. A dynastic change which introduces new sovereignties introduces new quarterings, as when the Hanoverian dynasty came to the throne of this country the quartering of Hanover was introduced, but purely personal arms in British heraldry are never introduced. The personal arms of Tudor and Stewart were never added to the Royal Arms of this country.

The origin of the English Royal Arms was dealt with on page 172. "Gules, three lions pa.s.sant guardant in pale or," as the arms of England, were used by Kings John, Henry III., Edward I., and Edward II. The quartering for France was introduced by Edward III., as explained on page 274, and the Royal s.h.i.+eld: Quarterly 1 and 4, France, ancient (azure, seme-de-lis or); 2 and 3, England (gules, three lions pa.s.sant guardant in pale or), was in use in the reigns of Edward III., Richard II. (who, however, impaled his arms with those of St. Edward the Confessor), and Henry IV. The last-mentioned king about 1411 reduced the number of fleurs-de-lis to _three_, and the s.h.i.+eld remained without further change till the end of the reign of Edward VI. Queen Mary did not alter the arms of this country, but during the time of her marriage with Philip of Spain they were always borne impaled with the arms of Spain. Queen Elizabeth bore the same s.h.i.+eld as her predecessors. But when James I. came to the throne the arms were: "Quarterly 1 and 4, quarterly i. and iiii. France, ii. and iii. England; 2.

Scotland (or, a lion rampant within a double tressure flory and counterflory gules); 3. Ireland (azure, a harp or, stringed argent)." The s.h.i.+eld was so borne by James I., Charles I., Charles II., and James II.

When William III. and Mary came to the throne an inescutcheon of the arms of Na.s.sau ("Azure, billetty and a lion rampant or") was {608} superimposed upon the Royal Arms as previously borne, for William III., and he impaled the same coat without the inescutcheon for his wife. At her death the impalement was dropped. After the Union with Scotland in 1707 the arms of England ("Gules, three lions," &c.) were _impaled_ with those of Scotland (the tressure not being continued down the palar line), and the impaled coat of England and Scotland was placed in the first and fourth quarters, France in the second, Ireland in the third.

At the accession of George I. the arms of Hanover were introduced in the fourth quarter. These were: "Tierced in pairle reversed, 1. Brunswick, gules, two lions pa.s.sant guardant in pale or; 2. Luneberg, or, seme of hearts gules, a lion rampant azure; 3. (in point), Westphalia, gules, a horse courant argent, and on an inescutcheon (over the fourth quarter) gules, the crown of Charlemagne (as Arch Treasurer of the Holy Roman Empire)."

At the union with Ireland in 1801 the opportunity was taken to revise the Royal Arms, and those of France were then discontinued. The escutcheon decided upon at that date was: "Quarterly, 1 and 4, England; 2. Scotland; 3. Ireland and the arms of Hanover were placed upon an inescutcheon." This inescutcheon was surmounted by the Electoral cap, for which a crown was subst.i.tuted later when Hanover became a kingdom.

At the death of William IV., by the operation of the Salic Law, the crowns of England and Hanover were separated, and the inescutcheon of Hanover disappeared from the Royal Arms of this country, and by Royal Warrant issued at the beginning of the reign of Queen Victoria the Royal Arms and badges were declared to be: 1 and 4, England; 2. Scotland; 3. Ireland. The necessary alteration of the cyphers are the only alterations made by his present Majesty.

The supporters date from the accession of James I. Before that date there had been much variety. Some of the Royal badges have been already alluded to in the chapter on that subject.

The differences used by various junior members of the Royal Family will be found in the Chapter on Marks of Cadency. {609}

CHAPTER XL

HATCHMENTS

A custom formerly prevailed in England, which at one time was of very considerable importance. This was the setting up of a hatchment after a death. No instances of hatchments of a very early date, as far as I am aware, are to be met with, and it is probably a correct conclusion that the custom, originating rather earlier, came into vogue in England during the seventeenth century and reached its height in the eighteenth. It doubtless originated in the carrying of ceremonial s.h.i.+elds and helmets (afterwards left in the church) at funerals in the sixteenth century, and in the earlier practice of setting up in the church the actual s.h.i.+eld of a deceased person. The cessation of the ceremonial funeral, no doubt, led to the cult of the hatchment. Hatchments cannot be said even yet to have come entirely to an end, but instances of their use are nowadays extremely rare, and since the early part of the nineteenth century the practice has been steadily declining, and at the present time it is seldom indeed that one sees a hatchment _in use_. The word "hatchment" is, of course, a corruption of the term "achievement," this being the heraldic term implying an emblazonment of the full armorial bearings of any person.

The manner of use was as follows. Immediately upon the death of a person of any social position a hatchment of his or her arms was set up over the entrance to his house, which remained there for twelve months, during the period of mourning. It was then taken down from the house and removed to the church, where it was set up in perpetuity. There are few churches of any age in this country which do not boast one or more of these hatchments, and some are rich in their possession. Those now remaining--for example, in St. Chad's Church in Shrewsbury--must number, I imagine, over a hundred.

There does not appear to have been any obligation upon a clergyman either to permit their erection, or to allow them to remain for any specified period. In some churches they have been discarded and relegated to the vestry, to the coal-house, or to the rubbish-heap, whilst in others they have been carefully preserved.

The hatchment was a diamond-shaped frame, painted black, and {610} enclosing a painting in oils upon wood, or more frequently canvas, of the full armorial bearings of the deceased person. The frame was usually about five feet six in height, and the rules for the display of arms upon hatchments afford an interesting set of regulations which may be applied to other heraldic emblazonments. The chief point, however, concerning a hatchment, and also the one in which it differs from an ordinary armorial emblazonment, lay in the colour of the groundwork upon which the armorial bearings were painted. For an unmarried person the whole of the groundwork was black, but for a husband or wife half was black and half white, the groundwork behind the arms of the deceased person being black, and of the surviving partner in matrimony white. The background for a widow or widower was entirely black. {611}

CHAPTER XLI

THE UNION JACK

BY REV. J. R. CRAWFORD

Orders in Council and other official doc.u.ments refer to this flag as the Union Flag, The Union Jack, Our Jack, The King's Colours, and the Union Banner, which last t.i.tle precise Heraldry usually adopts. In patriotic songs it is toasted as "The Red, White, and Blue," whilst in the Services men affectionately allude to it as "the dear old duster." But Britons at large cling to the t.i.tle which heads this chapter; to them it is "_The Union Jack_."

_Why Union?_ Obviously because it unites three emblems of tutelar saints on one flag, and thereby denotes the union of three peoples under one Sovereign. It is the motto "_Tria juncta in Uno_" rendered in bunting.

_Why Jack?_ Two theories are propounded, one fanciful, the other probable.

Some say "Jack" is the anglicised form of "Jacques," which is the French signature of James I., in whose reign and by whose command the first Union Flag was called into being. Against this at least three reasons may justly be urged: (1) The term "_Jack_" does not appear--so far as we can discover--in any warrant referring to the Jacobean Flag of 1606. It is rather in later doc.u.ments that this term occurs. (2) If the earliest Union Flag be a "_Jack_" just because it is the creation of James, then surely it follows that, to be consistent, later Union Flags, the creations of later sovereigns, should have borne those Sovereigns' names; for example _The Union Anne_, _The Union George_! (3) The English way of p.r.o.nouncing "Jacques" is not, and probably never was _Jack_, but _Jaikes_. The other, and more feasible theory, is as follows: The term "Jaque" (e.g. _jaque de mailles_) was borrowed from the French and referred to any jacket or coat on which, especially, heraldic emblems were blazoned. In days long prior to those of the first Stuart king, mention is made of "WHYTTE COTES WITH RED CROSSES WORN BY SHYPPESMEN AND MEN OF THE CETTE OF LONDON," from which sentence we learn that the emblem of the nation's tutelar saint was (as in yet earlier Crusaders' days) a _fighter's_ emblem. When such emblem or emblems were transferred to a flag, {612} the term _Jaque_ may well, in course of time, have been also applied to that flag, as previously to the jacket.

Glance now at the story of those Orders in Council which created the various Union flags. The very union of the two kingdoms of England and Scotland seems to have accentuated the pettier national jealousies, so that Southrons annoyed Northerners by hoisting the St. George above the St.

Andrew, and the Scotchmen retaliated by a species of _tu quoque_. The King sought to allay these quarrels by creating a British, as other than a purely English or Scottish, flag. But let the Proclamation speak for itself.

"_By the King._

"_Whereas, some differences hath arisen between Our subjects of South and North Britaine travelling by Seas, about the bearing of their Flagges: For the avoiding of all contentions hereafter, Wee have, with the advice of our Councill, ordered: That from henceforth all our Subjects of this Isle and Kingdome of Great Britaine, and all our members thereof, shall beare in their main-toppe the Red Crosse, commonly called St. George's Crosse, and the White Crosse, commonly called St. Andrew's Crosse, joyned together according to the forme made by our heralds, and sent by Us to our Admerall to be published to our Subjects: and in their fore-toppe our Subjects of South Britaine shall weare the Red Crosse onely as they were wont, and our Subjects of North Britaine in their fore-toppe the White Crosse onely as they were accustomed._"--1606.

This attempt at conciliating differences deserved but did not win success.

"_The King's Owne s.h.i.+pps_" deemed themselves slighted, since all vessels were treated alike in this matter, and so persistent was the agitation that at last, in Charles I.'s reign (1634), another Proclamation was issued "_for the honour of Oure s.h.i.+pps in Oure Navie Royall_," whereby those s.h.i.+ps alone had the right of hoisting "_the Union Flagge_." The days of the Commonwealth brought another change, for with the King the King's Flag disappeared. The Protector caused two new flags to be made, viz. _The Great Union_ (a flag little used, however, although it figured at his funeral obsequies), and which may be thus blazoned: _Quarterly 1 and 4, The St.

George_; 2. _The St. Andrew_; 3. _azure, a harp or, for Ireland; over all on an inescutcheon of pretence, sable, a lion rampant or_, for the Protector's personal arms, and _The Commonwealth Ensign_, which latter Parliament treated as the paramount flag. The most interesting features of this flag are that it was of three kinds, one red, one white, one blue, and that Ireland but not Scotland had a place on its folds. When the King came to {613} his own again yet another change was witnessed. By this Proclamation s.h.i.+ps in the Navy were to carry _The Union_, and all merchantmen _The St. George_, whilst these latter vessels were also to wear "_The Red Ensign with the St. George, on a Canton_." Pa.s.sing on, we reach the days of Queen Anne, who as soon as the union of the two Parliaments was accomplished, issued a famous Proclamation often quoted. Suffice it here to outline its effect.

PLATE IX.

[Ill.u.s.tration]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 775.]

The two crosses of _St. George_ and _St. Andrew_ were--as the Treaty of Union had agreed should be--"_conjoyned in such a manner as we should think fit_"; and what that manner was is "_described on the margent_" in the shape of a sketch. But further, in place of the _St. George_ being placed on the canton of the _Red Ensign_ of Charles II. (itself the _Commonwealth Ensign, minus_ the harp) the Proclamation ordered the "_Union_" as a canton, and finally this new Red Ensign was confined to the merchant s.h.i.+ps, whilst "_Our Jack_" was reserved for the use of the Navy, unless by particular warrant. Thus things continued until the union of Ireland with England and Scotland. The Proclamation referring to this Act of Union closes with the Herald's verbal blazon of the full Union Flag:--"_The Union Flag shall be Azure, the Crosses Saltire of St. Andrew and St. Patrick, Quarterly per saltire, countercharged Argent and Gules, the latter fimbriated of the second, surmounted by the Cross of St. George of the third, fimbriated as the Saltire._" Thus the Union, as displayed in bunting, was perfected.

Our _Union Flag_ is very remarkable, even amongst the flags of Christendom, both as a blending of crosses, and crosses only, and also as an emblem of the union of two or more countries. Yet it is not unique, for the flags of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway have a somewhat similar story to tell. The last two countries separated at {614} different dates from Denmark, and then together formed a United Scandinavian Kingdom. In separating, they each took to themselves a separate flag, and again, in uniting, they called into being a Union Banner. How they treated these changes Fig. 775 will ill.u.s.trate. Notwithstanding these acts of union both Scandinavians and Britons have had, and we still have, differences over these Union Flags.

Whilst, however, they based their protests on the sentiment of independence, we ground our grumblings on questions of heraldic precedence, and of the interpretation of verbal blazons. Leaving our neighbours to settle their differences, let us examine our own. Take the subject of precedence. Very early in the flag's history, Scotsmen were indignant because the St. Andrew was not placed over the St. George. All kinds of variations have been suggested to lessen this crux of precedence, but such attempts must plainly be in vain. Do what you will, some kind of precedence is unavoidable. The _St. George_, then, as representing the paramount partner, occupies the centre of the flag, whilst the _St. Andrew_, as senior in partners.h.i.+p to the _St. Patrick_, is placed _above the St.