Heraldry as art: An account of its development and practice, chiefly in England

by G. W. Eve

Although at first the mediaeval draughtsman followed the drawing of his imported or traditional motives very closely (as in the lions of some of the thirteenth century MSS. and seals), he soon began to treat them in his own way, the way that came to be considered peculiarly heraldic. In thus handling his motives he was entirely himself, and the outcome was the natural result of the splendid sense of design which characterized him. The style is rightly considered purely heraldic because it arose from its own heraldic conditions, and was the result of the very sane intention that the thing done should be suited to the use to which it was to be put, viz. to serve as a distinctive badge which could be seen, and easily read at a distance or when in motion. Such conditions dictated simple directness of treatment and resulted in that bold clear definition which combined with good distribution and the fine balance of colour that results from it, to produce a very decorative whole. Thus, as so frequently happens in other ways, the treatment at first suggested by reasons of practical convenience resulted in an effect of great decorative value. The method of depicting the pattern-like figures varied, as was natural, with the materials employed and with other varying circumstances, and, where opportunity served, a high degree of elaboration was reached; but whether the treatment was simple or elaborate, breadth of effect and decorative quality are nearly always conspicuous. The various methods of working, each satisfactory in its own way, are extremely interesting, as giving historic sanction to the choice of treatment in heraldic expression, and in opposition to the narrow view that as a certain kind of work admirably suits its purpose in its own place that same treatment should be obligatory in all other cases. The old work confirms the broader view, so that when a flat treatment, for example, in harmony or in contrast with surrounding decoration, seems desirable, the armorials may be done flatly; and when, on the other hand, a more elaborate treatment seems fit, modelling in relief or any other means of decorative expression may be properly employed. Nevertheless, the broad-minded advice to “do as you like” has been sometimes taken too literally. Order as well as freedom is necessary to the doing of good work, and that can only be secured by study of the subject from the systematic or archaeological, as well as from the artistic side.

Heraldic art reached its greatest strength in the fourteenth century, as appears in what was perhaps the most beautiful example of the work of the period, the shield of arms in Canterbury Cathedral, said to be that of Edward the Black Prince (Fig. 1). It is probably one of the shields that were used for his funeral. Here the lions of the English coat are admirably distributed and are full of power and spirit. The fleurs-de-lis of France are beautifully free and graceful, and are equally well-designed to occupy their spaces and as well proportioned to them. The whole work, which is so valuable a lesson in the best qualities of heraldic design, has suffered from the wear of the centuries; but sufficient remains to show that when uninjured it must have been superb.

Heraldic art continued finely decorative and expressive for a very considerable time until the forms which had shown so much spontaneity became more pattern-like, reverting in a measure to the character of such of the earlier figures as more nearly reproduced those of the textiles; for the fourteenth century examples, such as that to which we have just referred, show a conscious effort to express the attributes of strength and vitality which were associated with and were symbolized by the animals that were depicted. In the late mediaeval work this vivifying force became weakened under the numbing influence that is inseparable from the reiterated use of forms that have become stereotyped. In respect to the appeal which visible expression makes to the ordinary mind as opposed to mere diagrammatic indication, the best work of the fourteenth century in its effort to depict recognized attributes links itself in intention with the work of the Renaissance, although the methods that were employed differed so greatly.

Fig. 1.—Shield of the Black Prince in Canterbury Cathedral. Fourteenth Century.

At the end of the fifteenth century the personal bearing of heraldry in war had almost ceased, but it remained an important feature of the tournaments during the whole period of their existence.

Besides satisfying the martial sense which ever delights in brilliance and colour, it also gratified the desire for the expression of meaning in decoration, a mental attitude which heraldry exactly fitted. And heraldry thenceforward became mainly decorative, while retaining the allusive and symbolic qualities that are hardly separable from it.

In Tudor times the number of armorials increased in a very marked degree, no doubt sharing in the impetus given to the arts in England by the much-needed peace which followed the dynastic wars of York and Lancaster. As though to link it with that welcome event, beautiful and simple flowers added their charm to heraldry in notable quantity, and gillyflowers, columbine, marygold, and many more, appear on shields of arms and in crests, as well as in the garlands which were so admirably used as decorative accessories to the armorials.

The Gothic heraldry, in common with the other decorative arts, having become formalized into a style from which the human interest had to a great extent gone, a change took place in harmony with the new feeling; but in the revolt from the formalism of late Gothic art heraldry frequently went to the opposite extreme, and employed naturalistic forms in an unsuitable way.

Much of the Renaissance work, however, retained some of the best qualities of the Gothic, in the pose of the figures and in the general composition, while in addition it attempted a more detailed characterization than before.