COLLAR OF ESSES.
Although the suggestion made by C. (Vol. ii., p. 330.), viz. that the Collar of Esses had a "mechanical" origin, resulting from the mode of forming "the chain," and that "the name means no more than that the links were in the shape of the letter S.," could only be advocated by one unacquainted with the real formation of the collar, yet, as I am now pledged before the readers of "Notes and Queries" as the historiographer of livery collars, it may be expected that I should make some reply. This may be accompanied with the remark, that, about the reign of Henry VIII., a collar occurs, which might be adduced in support of the theory suggested by the Rev. Mr. Ellacombe, and adopted by C. It looks like a collar formed of esses; but it is not clear whether it was meant to do so, or was merely a rich collar of twisted gold links. That was the age of ponderous gold collars, but which were arbitrary features of ornamental costume, not collars of livery. Such a collar, however, resembles a series of esses placed obliquely and interlaced, as thus: SSSS; not laid flat on their sides, as figured by C. Again, it is true an (endless) chain of linked esses was formed merely by attaching the letters
"Per literam autem S. quæ Silentii apud Romanos nota fuit, secretum societatis et amicitiæ simulachrum, individuamque pro patriæ defensione Societatem denotari."—Fr. Mennenii Deliciæ Equest. Ordinum, 1613. 12mo. p. 153.
However, the answer to the suggestion of Mr. Ellacombe and C. consists in this important distinction, that the Lancastrian livery collar was not a chain of linked esses, but a collar of leather or other stiff material, upon which the letters were distinctly figured at certain intervals; and when it came to be made of metal only, the letters were still kept distinct and upright. On John of Ghent's collar, in the window of old St. Paul's (which I have already mentioned in p. 330.), there are only five,
S S S S S,
at considerable intervals. On the collar of the poet Gower the letters occur thus,—
SSSSS SSSSS.
On that of Queen Joan of Navarre, at Canterbury, thus,—
S | S | S | S | S | S |
There is then, I think, little doubt that this device was the symbolum or nota of some word of which S was the initial letter; whether Societas, or Silentium, or Souvenance, or Soveraigne, or Seneschallus, or whatever else ingenuity or fancy may suggest, this is the question,—a question which it is scarcely possible to settle authoritatively without the testimony of some unequivocal contemporary statement. But I flatter myself that I have now clearly shown that the esses were neither the links of a chain nor yet (as suggested in a former paper) identical with the gormetti fremales, or horse-bridles, which are said to have formed the livery collar of the King of Scots.
John Gough Nichols.
"Christus purpureum gemmati textus in auro
Signabat Labarum, Clypeorum insignia Christus
Scripserat; ardebat summis crux addita cristis."
By the same sort of reasoning—viz. conjecture—that Mr. John Gough Nichols adheres to the opinion that the Collar of SS. takes its name from the word Seneschallus, it might be contended that the initial letters of the lines above quoted mystically stand for "Collar, S. S." Enough, however, has already been written on this unmeaning point to show that some of us are "great gowks," or, in other words, stupid guffs, to waste so much pen, ink, and paper on the subject.
There are other topics, however, connected with the Collar of SS. which are of real interest to a
numerous section of the titled aristocracy in the United Kingdom; and it is with these, as bearing upon the heraldic and gentilitial rights of the subject, that I am desirous to grapple. Mr. Nichols, and those who pin faith upon his dicta, hold that the Collar of SS. was a livery ensign bestowed by our kings upon certain of their retainers, in much the same sense and fashion as Cedric the Saxon is said to have given a collar to Wamba, the son of Witless. For myself, and all those entitled to carry armorial bearings in the kingdom, I repudiate the notion that the knightly golden Collar of SS. was ever so conferred or received. Further, I maintain that there was a distinction between what Mr. Nichols calls "the Livery Collar of SS.," and the said knightly golden Collar of SS., as marked and broad as is the difference between the Collar of the Garter and the collar of that four-footed dignitary which bore the inscription,
"I am the Prince's Dog at Kew,
Pray whose Dog are you?"
In his last communication Mr. Nichols lays it down that "livery collars were perfectly distinct from collars of knighthood;" adding, they did not exist until a subsequent age. Of course the collars of such royal orders of knighthood as have been established since the days of our Lancastrian kings had necessarily no existence at the period to which he refers. But Gough (not Mr. Gough Nichols) mentions that the Collar of SS. was upon the monument of Matilda Fitzwalter, of Dunmow, who lived in the reign of King John; and Ashmole instances a monument in the collegiate church at Warwick, with the portraiture of Margaret, wife of Sir William Peito, said to have been sculptured there in the reign of Edward III. What credit then are we to attach to Mr. N.'s averment, that the "Collar of Esses was not a badge of knighthood, nor a badge of personal merit, but was a collar of livery, and the idea typified by livery was feudal dependence, or what we now call party?" What sort of feudal dependence was typified by the ensign of equestrian nobility upon the necks of the two ladies named, or upon the neck of Queen Joan of Navarre? Mr. Nichols states that in the first Lancastrian reigns the Collar of SS. had no pendant, though, afterwards, it had a pendant called "the king's beast." On the effigy of Queen Joan the collar certainly has no pendant, except the jewelled ring of a trefoil form. But on the ceiling and canopy of the tomb of Henry IV., his arms, and those of his queen (Joan of Navarre), are surrounded with Collars of SS., the king's terminating in an eagle volant (rather an odd sort of a beast), whilst the pendant of the queen's has been defaced.
Mr. Nichols, in a postscript, puts this query to the antiquaries of Scotland: "Can any of them help me to the authority from which Nich. Upton derived his livery collar of the King of Scotland de gormettis fremalibus equorum?" If Mr. N. puts this query from no other data than the citation given in my former paper upon this subject (vide Vol. ii., p. 194.), he need not limit it to the antiquaries of Scotland. Upton's words are as follows:—
"Rex etiam scocie dare solebat pro signo vel titulo suo, unum collarium de gormettis fremalibus equorum de auro vel argento."
This passage neither indicates that a King of Scotland is referred to, nor does it establish that the collar was given as a livery sign or title. It merely conveys something to this purport, that the king was accustomed to give to his companions, as a sign or title, a collar of gold or silver shaped like the bit of a horse's bridle.
Mr. Nichols takes exception to Favine as an heraldic authority. Could that erudite author arise from his grave, I wonder how he would designate Mr. Nichols's lucubrations on livery collars, &c. But hear Matthew Paris: that learned writer says Equites Aurati were known in his day "by a gold ring on their thumbs, by a chain of gold about their necks, and gilt spurs." Let us look to Scotland: Nesbit says, vol. ii. p. 87.:
"Our knights were no less anciently known by belts than by their gilt spurs, swords, &c. In the last place is the collar, an ensign of knightly dignity among the Germans, Gauls, Britains, Danes, Goths, &c. In latter times it was the peculiar fashion of knights amongst us to wear golden collars composed of SS."
Brydson, too, in his Summary View of Heraldry in reference to the Usages of Chivalry, and the General Economy of the Feudal System, (a work of uncommon ingenuity, deserving to be called the Philosophy of Heraldry), observes, p. 186, ch. v., that knights were distinguished by an investiture which implied superior merit and address in arms—by the attendance of one or more esquires—by the title Sir—by wearing a crest—a helmet of peculiar form—apparel peculiarly splendid—polished armour of a particular construction—gilded spurs—and a Golden Collar.
He states, ch. iv., p. 132.:
"In the fifth dissertation of Du Cange it is shown that the splendid habits which the royal household anciently received at the great festivals, were called 'Liveries,' being delivered or presented from the king."
But he nowhere countenances for a moment any of the errors entertained by Mr. John Gough Nichols, which these remarks are intended to explode.
Mr. Nichols has not yet answered B.'s query. Nor can he answer it until he previously admits that he is wrong upon the four points enumerated in my opening article (Vol. ii., p. 194.).
Armiger.