Part 26 (1/2)
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 350.--Bishop Grandison.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 351.--Secretum of Bishop le Despencer.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 352.--Sir Fulk Fitz Warin.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 353.--Thomas le Scrope.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 354.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 355.]
At an early period, Cadency was marked by _adding a single small charge_ to the blazon of a s.h.i.+eld, or by charging some secondary device or figure upon any accessory of a s.h.i.+eld of arms. Such a Mark of Cadency as this, obtained from some allied s.h.i.+eld, and charged upon an ordinary or princ.i.p.al bearing, or occupying a conspicuous position in the general composition, was in high favour with the Heralds of both the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. From the early examples, which exist in great numbers and in as great variety, it will be sufficient for me to adduce only a few specimens--a single example, indeed, ill.u.s.trates the system.
The s.h.i.+eld of _Ufford_, in the Seal of MATILDA of LANCASTER, which I have already described (No. 320), is thus differenced with a single fleur de lys in the first quarter. Precisely in the same manner Sir FULK FITZ WARIN differences the s.h.i.+eld of the head of his house, No. 17, by charging a _mullet sable_ upon the first quarter, as in No. 352. THOMAS LE SCROPE, on the other hand, for Cadency marks the golden bend upon his azure s.h.i.+eld, No. 111, with an _annulet sable_, as in No. 353. Two members of the family of Beauchamp charge their golden fesse (see Nos.
346-349), the one with a _crescent sable_, and the other with a _pierced mullet_ of the same tincture: Nos. 354, 355. In like manner, in addition to various labels, the NEVILLES charge no less than eight different small figures upon their silver saltire, No. 121, to distinguish different members and branches of their powerful race: I give one of these s.h.i.+elds in No. 356, which was borne by GEORGE NEVILLE, Lord LATIMER, from the monument to Earl RICHARD DE BEAUCHAMP at Warwick--_Gu., on a saltire arg. a gimmel-ring az._: another differenced s.h.i.+eld of Neville, No. 357, has _a cinquefoil_ charged on the saltire: a third example from this group I have already given, No. 122, differenced with _a rose_: this s.h.i.+eld, No. 122, is now borne by the Earl of ABERGAVENNY. Once more: Sir WILLIAM DE BREWYS (E. 2) bears--_Az., crusilee and a lion rampt. or_, No. 358, which coat another Sir WILLIAM DE BREWYS differences, to distinguish himself from his kinsman, while at the same time declaring their near relations.h.i.+p, by simply charging a _red fleur de lys_ upon his lion's shoulder.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 356.--Lord Latimer.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 357.--Neville.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 358.--Sir William de Brewys.]
Differences of Illegitimacy, which rightly and indeed necessarily are included under the general head of ”Cadency,” do not appear at any time to have a.s.sumed a definite or decided character, and yet they bring before the student of Heraldry much curious matter for inquiry and investigation. Early in the true heraldic era illegitimate sons are found to have differenced their paternal arms, as other sons lawfully born might have done: and it does not appear that any peculiar methods of differencing were adopted, palpably for the purpose of denoting illegitimacy of birth, before the fourteenth century had drawn near to its close. And even then, if any express heraldic rule on this point ever was framed, which is very doubtful, it certainly was never observed with any care or regularity.
The earliest known example of the arms of a man of illegitimate birth is the fine s.h.i.+eld of WILLIAM LONGESPeE, Earl of SALISBURY, son of HENRY II. and FAIR ROSAMOND, No. 197. This s.h.i.+eld is supposed to have been a.s.sumed and borne by the Earl on his marriage with the daughter and heiress of D'EVREUX, when in right of his wife he succeeded to the Earldom of Salisbury: but this theory does not rest upon any solid foundation, since it would be very difficult to show that the s.h.i.+eld with the six lioncels was certainly borne, on his armorial ensign, by the father-in-law of Earl William. Also, if a s.h.i.+eld charged with an escarbuncle and many lioncels, which has been a.s.signed to GEOFFREY Count of ANJOU, was really borne by the Founder of the House of PLANTAGENET, Earl WILLIAM LONGESPeE may have derived his own s.h.i.+eld from his paternal grandfather. Upon his Counterseal the Earl displays his own ”long sword”
as his proper device. In like manner, certain other personages, also illegitimate, appear to have borne arms which were either expressly a.s.signed to themselves by the Sovereign, or such as they a.s.sumed in right of their mothers or wives. In all such cases as these, the Arms were not the paternal coat in any way differenced, but what now would be designated ”fresh grants.” Towards the beginning of the fifteenth century, however, a peculiar kind of Differencing for Illegitimacy gradually prevailed throughout Europe: thus, illegitimate children either altered the position of the charges in their paternal s.h.i.+eld; or they marshalled the entire paternal arms upon a bend or a fesse; or they composed for themselves a fresh s.h.i.+eld, either using their father's badges and the actual charges of his s.h.i.+eld, or adopting devices evidently derived from the paternal bearings; or they bore the paternal s.h.i.+eld differenced in a peculiarly conspicuous manner with certain marks by which they might be readily and certainly distinguished.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 359.--Henry, Earl of Worcester.]
When the composition of the paternal s.h.i.+eld would admit of such an arrangement, the field not being argent, an illegitimate son sometimes bore his father's arms marshalled fesse-wise, so as to leave both the chief and the base of his s.h.i.+eld plain white. HENRY, Earl of WORCESTER, whose father was an illegitimate son of HENRY BEAUFORT, third Duke of SOMERSET, bore the arms of Beaufort couped in this manner in chief and in base, as if they were charged upon a very broad fesse on the field: No. 359.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 360.--Beaufort before 1397.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 361.--Beaufort after 1397.]
JOHN DE BEAUFORT (great-grandfather of HENRY, Earl of WORCESTER), eldest illegitimate son of Prince JOHN of GHENT, _before_ the Act for his legitimation was pa.s.sed in the year 1397, bore his father's hereditary arms of _Lancaster_--_England with a label of France_, No. 249--_on a broad bend_, the field being _per pale arg. and az._, the Lancastrian livery colours: No. 360. After their legitimation act had become a law, this same JOHN DE BEAUFORT, with his brothers, sons, and grandsons, bore the Royal quartered s.h.i.+eld of France and England, No. 361, differenced, not with labels, but with _a bordure componee arg. and az._ (the Lancastrian colours): the different members of the Beaufort family slightly varied the bordure, but by the head of their house it was borne as in No. 361. It will be seen that this is the coat that HENRY, Earl of WORCESTER (himself the legitimate son of an illegitimate son), bore fesse-wise, as in No. 359. The father of this Earl HENRY, CHARLES SOMERSET, Earl of WORCESTER (illegitimate son of the third Duke of SOMERSET), differenced _Beaufort_, No. 361, with a _silver bendlet sinister_, as in No. 362, the bendlet covering the quarterings, but being included within the bordure.
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 362.--Charles, Earl of Worcester.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 363.--Sir Roger de Clarendon.]
[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 364.--Radolphus de Arundel.]
Since the fifteenth century, in English Heraldry, a narrow bendlet or baton sinister, couped at its extremities, either plain or charged, has usually been the mark employed as difference by the illegitimate descendants of the Royal Family. It was borne by ARTHUR PLANTAGENET, Viscount LISLE, son of EDWARD IV.: by HENRY FITZ ROY, Duke of RICHMOND, son of HENRY VIII., and, variously differenced, by illegitimate descendants of CHARLES II.--that is, it is borne at the present day, _argent_, by the Duke of BUCCLEUCH; _ermine_, by the Duke of CLEVELAND; _componee arg. and az._, by the Duke of GRAFTON; and, _gules charged with three white roses_, by the Duke of ST. ALBANS.
Sir ROGER DE CLARENDON, illegitimate son of the BLACK PRINCE, bore _on a sable bend the three Ostrich Feathers_ of his ill.u.s.trious father's ”_s.h.i.+eld of Peace_,” the field of his s.h.i.+eld being golden, as in No.
363. Here the ”Difference for Illegitimacy” is very emphatically marked in a singularly felicitous and beautiful s.h.i.+eld.
The paternal arms of illegitimate children have also sometimes been carried by them charged on a _canton_, either dexter or sinister, the rest of the s.h.i.+eld being left blank, or perhaps in some cases displaying the maternal arms; of this usage I am not able to give any good example, in English Heraldry, of certain authority: one other variety of these singular s.h.i.+elds, however, I must add to my small group of examples, which was first noticed by Mr. MONTAGU (”Guide to the Study of Heraldry,” p. 44). This is the s.h.i.+eld, No. 364, of RADOLPHUS DE ARUNDEL; and it bears the quartered arms of the Earls of ARUNDEL--_Fitz Alan_ and _Warrenne_ (_gu. a lion rampt. or_, and No. 68), ”_flanched_,”--that is, blazoned only upon the flanches (see No. 141) of the s.h.i.+eld, the central area being blank.
For a lengthy period the use of the _bend_, _bendlet_, and _baton sinister_ was usual for the purpose of denoting illegitimacy, but this has now given way to the use, in England, of a _bordure wavy_; in Scotland, of a _bordure compony_; whilst in Ireland both these _bordures_ are used, more usually, however, the _bordure wavy_ being employed. By a curious divergence the _bordure wavy_ is not a mark of illegitimacy in Scotland, but a mark of perfectly legitimate cadency.
The use of the _bendlet sinister_ for the debruising of crests still exists in England and Ireland, but crests are not usually differenced for any reason in Scotland.