For a short time during the latter part of the thirteenth and beginning of the fourteenth century the arms of husband and wife were combined in one shield by the curious device of halving or 'dimidiating' them, by joining the half of the one to the opposite half of the other, as in the arms of Aymer of Valence and Mary de Seynt Pol, still borne (since 1347) by the lady's foundation of Pembroke college at Cambridge. Owing however to the many inconveniences which this plan involved, it was soon exchanged for the more simple way of 'impaling' or placing the entire arms of both parties side by side in one shield (fig. [146] and pls. [VIII] C, [XVIII] A, B), a practice that has continued ever since, except when the wife is an heiress. In that case the lady's arms are usually drawn upon a smaller shield and placed upon the middle of the husband's arms (pl. [V] A). This ugly and most inconvenient plan, though of considerable antiquity, might very well be amended by the more ancient way of quartering the arms together, as is still done by the children of the heiress. For rules for the combination of the arms of a husband who has married two or more wives, or the cumbrous regulations as to quartering, the student may, if he wishes, consult the various manuals of heraldry.
Fig. 146. Shield of Bryen impaling Bures, from a brass in Acton church, Suffolk.
When a man is a member of any Order, such as the Garter or the Bath, only his own arms should be encircled by the insignia of the Order. Exceptions to this rule can of course be found, but it is otherwise a general one that ought strictly to be followed. Bishops are entitled to bear their personal arms only impaled with those of their bishopstool or cathedral church, and the same rule applies to deans, heads of colleges, and regius professors (like those at Cambridge) who have official arms. The chancellor of a University presumably may impale its arms with his own.
It has already been shown that the arms of ladies, all through the medieval period, were borne in precisely the same way as their fathers' or their husbands', that is, upon a shield, lozenge, or roundel, and that the present inconvenient restriction to a lozenge did not come into use much before the middle of the sixteenth century, when heraldry and heraldic art were already on the down-grade. The present custom seems to be for the arms of married ladies to be borne upon shields, and of widows and spinsters upon lozenges. From the artistic standpoint it would certainly be desirable, whenever it is thought advisable, to revert to the freedom of pre-Elizabethan times.
Enough has already been said as to the elasticity of drawing shields, helms, crests, and mantlings, and as to the proper use of supporters, but a few words may be added as to the proper way of drawing the various creatures that are used in heraldry.
Since heraldry is a survival of what was once a living thing, it is clear that if modern work is to look well, animals and birds ought to be drawn in a more or less conventional manner (figs. [148], [149]). Some, such as elephants, dogs, falcons, etc. may be drawn almost directly from nature; but others, especially lions, if so represented, would manifestly be unfit to consort with the leopards, the wivers, the griffins, the two-headed eagles, and other delightful creatures of the early heralds which they borrowed from the bestiaries. The conventional treatment should not, however, be carried to excess, nor should natural forms be too closely copied. Here, as in other matters connected with heraldry, a comparative study of good ancient examples will soon show what are the best types to follow.