Part 25 (2/2)
The _Label_, borne as a Mark of Cadency, was sometimes, particularly in the cases of junior members of the Royal Family, charged with other figures and devices, as differences of a secondary rank. Or, when it is thus charged, the charges upon a Label may be considered to be elements of the Label itself, in its capacity of a Mark of Cadency. EDMOND, the first Earl of LANCASTER, as I have already shown, No. 249, differenced his father's Arms of England with a _Label of France_, No. 338--an azure label, that is, charged with golden fleurs de lys, to denote his French alliance; and thus by the same process he was Marshalling and Marking Cadency. JOHN OF GHENT, Duke of LANCASTER, differenced with an _ermine Label_, No. 339, derived from the ermine s.h.i.+eld of Brittany (No. 15): and the Plantagenet Dukes of YORK charged each point of their silver Label with _three torteaux_, No. 340, which may be considered to have been derived from the s.h.i.+eld of Wake (No. 82). In order to show them on a larger scale, the Labels in Nos. 338-343 are represented without the s.h.i.+elds on which they were charged. All these s.h.i.+elds would be repet.i.tions of the same blazonry of France and England quarterly: Nos.
252 and 253.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 338.--Lancaster.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 339.--Brittany.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 340.--York.]
The Label, with various Differences, has generally been the Royal Mark of Cadency; and now differenced silver Labels are borne, to mark Cadency, by every member of our Royal Family.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 341.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 342.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 343.]
Like the points of Labels, the Charges blazoned on those points had no fixed or determinate numbers. That both the Labels and their Charges should be distinct and conspicuous, was the special object with which they were blazoned. Accordingly, in different examples of the same Label the number of the repet.i.tions of the Charges sometimes is found to differ. At the same time, in the earliest examples of charged Labels, the repet.i.tions of the Charges, while devoid of any special differencing aim or meaning, may be considered to have been suggested by the sources from which the Charges themselves were derived. For example: the Label of Lancaster, No. 338, of Earl EDMOND, derived directly from the s.h.i.+eld of _France ancient_, No. 247, with its field _semee de lys_, has three fleurs de lys upon each point, so that this Label has the appearance of being also _semee de lys_. Had it been derived from the s.h.i.+eld of _France modern_, No. 248, charged with three fleurs de lys only, a single fleur de lys in all probability would have been blazoned on each of the three points of this same Label. Upon this principle the Label of Prince LIONEL, DUKE of CLARENCE, second son of EDWARD III., which is differenced with _cantons gules_, has a single canton on each point, as in No. 341, evidently because only a single canton can be blazoned on a s.h.i.+eld. The figures and devices that are charged for secondary difference upon Labels vary widely in their character; but, however difficult it now may be in very many instances to trace these differencing charges to their sources, and so to determine the motive which led to their adoption, there can be no doubt that originally they were chosen and adopted for the express purpose of denoting and recording some alliance or dependency. Some early Labels are of a compound character; that is, they are charged with two distinct groups of devices, which are at once divided and conjoined by impalement. Such a Label was borne by Prince HENRY, son of JOHN of GHENT, between the time of his father's death and his own accession as HENRY IV. (Feb. 3 to Sept. 30, 1399): it was a _Label of five points per pale of Brittany and Lancaster_, No. 342, being his father's Label impaling that of his mother's father. The second son of this Prince, THOMAS Duke of CLARENCE, instead of adopting impalement, charged _a red canton upon each point of an ermine Label_, as in No. 343: while his brother, JOHN Duke of BEDFORD, bore their father's Label, No. 342.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 344.--Holland, of Kent.]
The BORDURE, both plain and charged, is a Mark of Cadency borne by Princes and by personages of various ranks. EDMOND, youngest son of EDWARD I., differenced _England_ with a plain _silver bordure_, as in No. 344: the HOLLANDS, Earls of KENT, did the same: and the same silver bordure also was borne by THOMAS, youngest son of EDWARD III., about the quartered s.h.i.+eld of _France ancient and England_; and about the quartered s.h.i.+eld of _France modern and England_ by HUMPHREY, youngest son of HENRY IV. Prince JOHN of ELTHAM, as I have already shown, and after him the HOLLANDS, Dukes of EXETER, differenced _England with a Bordure of France_: No. 24. Though not so numerous as Labels, Bordures employed to mark Cadency exist in very many early examples, and a variety of devices appear charged upon them for secondary Difference.
See No. 140. In the Royal Heraldry of our own times the Bordure is not used as a Royal Difference; but its use is retained in Scotland for differencing s.h.i.+elds of less exalted rank.
In some few early Examples a BENDLET is charged upon the paternal s.h.i.+eld as a mark of Cadency: and a BARRULET is found to have been also used for the same purpose. Thus, HENRY, second son of EDMOND the first Earl of LANCASTER, during the lifetime of his elder brother, differenced _England_ with an _azure Bendlet_, as in No. 345: and, in the Seal of HENRY DE PERCY, son and heir of HENRY third Baron, the lion is debruised, for Difference, by a Barrulet which crosses the s.h.i.+eld in the honour-point. Possibly, this Barrulet may be a _Label without points_.
A CANTON, plain, or more frequently charged, and in many examples of ermine, is also added to s.h.i.+elds to mark Cadency, but more frequently nowadays its use denotes absence of blood descent. See Nos. 128, 129, 130.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 345.--Henry of Lancaster.]
To mark Cadency by a _change of Tinctures_ was a simple expedient, and such a one as would naturally be practised at an early period. It was effected, first, in the case of the _Field_: thus (H. 3) the brothers DE LA ZOUCHE severally bear--_Gu., bezantee_, and, _Az., bezantee_; and the brothers FURNIVAL (H. 3) bear--_Arg., a bend between six martlets gu._, and, _Or, a bend between six martlets gu._ Secondly, the change is effected in the _Charges_: thus, two William BARDOLFS (H. 3 and E. 2) severally bear--_Az., three cinquefoils or_, and, _Az., three cinquefoils arg._ Thirdly, the tinctures are _reversed_: for example, for two Sir JOHN HARCOURTS (E. 2)--_Gu., two bars or_, and, _Or, two bars gu._ Fourthly, there is a complete change in _all the tinctures_: and so, while Sir ANDREW LOTEREL (E. 2) bears--_Or, a bend between six martlets sa._, Sir GEFFREY LOTEREL (E. 2) bears--_Az., a bend between six martlets argent_. Finally, this system of marking Cadency admits various modifications of the changes already described: thus, in the Arms of Mortimer, No. 131, _gules_ is subst.i.tuted for _azure_; and, again, in the same s.h.i.+eld an _inescutcheon ermine_ takes the place of the _inescutcheon argent_.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 346.--Beauchamp of Elmely.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 347.--Beauchamp at Carlaverock.]
Another and a favourite method of marking Cadency, calculated to exercise a great and decided influence in the development of heraldic blazon, is the _addition of secondary Charges_ of small size (not on a Label or a Bordure but) semee over the field of a s.h.i.+eld, or charged upon an Ordinary, or disposed in orle. In a large number of examples, these small charges are found to have been gradually reduced to six or three, in order to admit of their being blazoned on a somewhat larger scale, and consequently made more distinct. Again: while the number and the tinctures of the secondary differencing charges remain the same, in order to carry out the Cadency still farther the secondary charges themselves are varied: and, once more, in other cases the ident.i.ty of the original secondary charges is retained, but their number is increased or diminished. I must be content to ill.u.s.trate these various forms of Cadency with a few examples only. First, a group of s.h.i.+elds of the BEAUCHAMPS:--Beauchamp of Elmely (H. 3)--_Gu., a fesse or_, No. 346: Beauchamp at Carlaverock--_Gu., crusilee and a fesse or_, No. 347: Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick--_Gu., a fesse between six crosses crosslets or_, No. 348: and Beauchamp of Bletshoe--_Gu., a fesse between six martlets or_, No. 349. Second, a corresponding group of s.h.i.+elds of the BERKELEYS:--Maurice de Barkele (or Berkeley)--_Gu., a chevron arg._ (H. 3): and then for other Berkeleys--_Gu., a chevron between ten crosses pattees, six and four, arg._; and the same Ordinary, with either _ten cinquefoils of silver_, or the same number of _white roses_. Three CORBETS bear severally (E. 2)--_Or, a raven sa._; _Or, two ravens sa._; and, _Or, three ravens sa._ And, once more, their original s.h.i.+eld--_Gu., a chevron or_, is differenced by the COBHAMS by charging the Ordinary with three lioncels, three eaglets, three crosslets, three mullets, three estoiles, three crescents, or three fleurs de lys, all of them sable. The particular devices and figures selected thus to mark Cadency, like those charged upon Labels or Bordures, must be considered to have a special significance of their own, though this significance may frequently fail to be discerned in consequence of our being no longer able to trace out their a.s.sociation with the sources from which they were obtained. The alliances and the incidents that give these various Marks of Cadency, when it is possible to ascertain what they may have been, ill.u.s.trate in a striking manner the motives by which the early Heralds were influenced when they differenced the Arms of Kinsmen.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 348.--Beauchamp of Warwick.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 349.--Beauchamp of Bletshoe.]
_Official Insignia_ sometimes become Marks of Cadency. Thus, JOHN DE GRANDISON, Bishop of Exeter (A.D. 1327-1369), on the bend in his paternal arms, No. 89, subst.i.tutes a _golden mitre_ for the central eaglet, as in No. 350. WILLIAM COURTENAY, Archbishop of Canterbury (A.D.
1381-1396), adopts a different course, and charges three golden mitres upon each point of the Label of Courtenay--_Or, three torteaux, over all a label of three points az. charged on each point with as many mitres gold_. And again, HENRY LE DESPENCER, Bishop of Norwich (A.D.
1370-1406), places about his paternal s.h.i.+eld an _azure bordure charged with eight golden mitres_ (see the largest s.h.i.+eld in No. 351). On his official seal the canopied effigy of the Bishop stands between this, his personal s.h.i.+eld, and the s.h.i.+eld of his see--_az., three mitres or_: but his Secretum, or private seal, is much more interesting, as an heraldic image of the man himself. Haughty, fierce, cruel, and pugnacious, his career not less inglorious as a military commander than as a churchman, this HENRY LE DESPENCER, a grandson of the unhappy favourite of the no less hapless EDWARD II., was one of the war-loving prelates who occasionally appear sustaining a strange, and yet as it would seem a characteristic, part in the romantic drama of mediaeval history. His Secretum, No. 351, displays his s.h.i.+eld of _Despencer_, differenced with his bordure of mitres, couche from a large mantled helm, surmounted by a mitre, in place of a crest-coronet, which supports the Despencer crest, a silver griffin's head of ample size; on either side are the s.h.i.+elds of the _see of Norwich_, and of _Ferrers_ (the Bishop's mother was Anne, daughter of WILLIAM Lord FERRERS of Groby)--_Or, seven mascles, three three and one, gu._; the legend is, S . HENRICI . DESPENCER .
NORWICENSIS . EPISCOPI.
<script>