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

by G. W. Eve

In many respects it was very admirable and seems, in its suggestion of individual thought working on the traditions of an older style, to suggest the lines on which modern heraldic design might develop. German heraldry has followed these lines to a large extent, and though it has perhaps become over-florid, is still full of proofs of the advantage which results from continued touch with the Gothic.

In this country there had been a constant succession of foreign masons and sculptors, from the time when, in the twelfth century, the Frenchman William of Sens came to restore Canterbury Cathedral, and the Renaissance style probably received its most effective impetus in England from Torregiano and his fellow Florentine artists when they superseded the native workers in the designing and carrying out of the tombs of Henry VII and others in the beginning of the sixteenth century. The king’s tomb was begun in 1503, and is a useful landmark in the history of the evolution of heraldic style. From this and similar works the English sculptors and designers learnt the methods of that revival of art on classic lines which had become developed in Italy for nearly a century before it made so definite an impression here.

The work that was produced under these influences was marked by great vitality, variety and grace, until it, in its turn, became weak and uninteresting, so that by the seventeenth century it had degenerated into sheer stiff ugliness that it is almost impossible to connect with the graceful strength of its prototypes.

Holbein, who worked here (except for a short interval) from 1526 until his death, executed, besides his paintings, many designs for goldsmith’s work and so forth, and has left some few heraldic drawings, probably designs for the decoration of books, such as dedicatory plates, or for stained glass; but the Italian influence was overpowering, and he left little permanent impression on heraldic style. An example of his heraldry may be referred to in Fig. 221, p. 243.

As time went on, and the practical use of heraldry in the field became more remote, the sense of proportion became weakened, the decorative distribution of the early work was no longer sought after, and the general loss of grip is everywhere perceptible in the design; while in the execution, especially in later times, minute finish of detail took the place of the earlier breadth of treatment. The marked inferiority of the heraldry to the other decorative work of its time (a fault that is frequently visible in the work of the present day) points to a general loss of interest in the expression of heraldry, although its use was tenaciously adhered to, and it is abundantly evident that in the period which extended from the early seventeenth century until recent times regard for heraldry (when such regard existed at all except as a mere desire of display) was mainly directed to its systematic side and to the ever-increasing detail of its rules and precedents.

However, the Gothic revival in the early part of last century again directed attention to heraldry, and the work of Williment, Pugin, Powell, Burges and others, showed once more how decoratively and expressively it could be handled when it was seriously studied and applied.

With reference to the old examples, a study of which is absolutely necessary in order to understand the principles which underlie all heraldic design, it will be well to sound a note of warning against making a fetish of the work of any period, however good; against mere copying of old examples however excellent, except, of course, for purposes of study. To merely copy and piece together bits of precedent is not the way to make an artistic thing at all. A copy can have no vitality of its own, and cannot even reproduce that of its original. Even Pugin and Powell cannot be said, in spite of all their sympathy and power of draughtsmanship, to have altogether succeeded in suggesting the intense vigour which characterized the work of the originals that were followed. A broad view must be taken if new work is to harmonize with new conditions or be anything more than a mere shadow of a preceding style.

Heraldry in order to be expressive and interesting ought to be original, or perhaps one should rather say individual, in treatment; an effort to express itself by means of the artistic qualities that the old work possesses and teaches us to admire, rather than a copy of its forms. By original is meant something that the artist thinks out for himself, his individual expression of what he wishes to convey, with all the help that he can obtain from his knowledge of previous work, but without feeling himself bound to imitate it. Points of resemblance are inevitable. It is hardly possible to avoid showing the influence of the examples from which the artist has learnt his craft, nor does it matter; but when the copy is intentional and the intention stops at that, the work ceases to interest as individual design. All styles should be studied for the sake of the lessons they may teach in the application of the ordinary principles of design to correct heraldic motives, for, after all, that and fitness are what constitute good heraldry. Composition, the balance of mass and arrangement of line, with all their various possibilities, may be learned from all forms and styles of art, pictorial as well as ornamental, that is itself based on sound principles. The appreciation of such points and their satisfactory application constitute what we know as the sense and power of design, and they must be understood before one can pretend to practise or discuss it.

Heraldry in its setting forth may be regarded in two ways. As the depicting of an actual shield, crest, helm and so forth, as they would be shown in a picture of a tournament, for instance; or, as a presentation of the heraldic facts in the way that is thought most expressive without having too much regard to preceding renderings. The former way seems more suitable to the execution of ancient and historic arms or of such as are to accompany Gothic surroundings, and the latter to be more likely to harmonize with modern decorative conditions, as well as to possess more vitality and variety in itself. This harmony with surrounding decoration, whether on a wall or in a book or in any other way, is one of the essentials of good design and must be continually kept in mind. Another, equally important, is that work should be designed with direct regard to the materials and methods by which it is to be done. These very obvious points cannot be too often insisted upon, however wearisome the reiteration, for neglect of them is at the bottom of most bad work.

Careless treatment of the heraldry, with which it is, nevertheless, obliged to deal more or less, sooner or later, seems to pervade applied art and to spoil what is otherwise meritorious work. Doubtless much of the mischief arises from fear lest improving the drawing or composition may violate heraldic rules; and this brings us to the necessity of acquiring so much knowledge of the systematic side of heraldry as will suffice to show what points are really essential (and therefore to be carefully preserved and if need be accented), and what, on the other hand, may be modified or ignored. This may best be done by study of the system of heraldic description known as blazon, which is described further on. But before proceeding to do so it will be necessary to deal first with an heraldic composition as a whole.