Philip S. King.
DEVIZES, ORIGIN OF: A QUESTION FOR THE HERALDS.
I will put the following case as briefly as I can.
Throughout the mediæval ages, the word devise formed the generic term for every species of emblazonment. Thus we have "Devises Heroiques, per Claude Paradin, Lyons, 1557;" "Devises et Emblems d'Amour moralisés, par Flamen;" "The Paradise of Dainty Devices, 1576;" "Minerva Britannica, or a Garden of Heroical Devices furnished and adorned with Emblems and Impressa's of Sundry Natives, newly devised, moralised, and published by Henry Peachum, 1612;" and lastly, Henry Estienne's "discourse of hieroglyphs, symbols, gryphs, emblems, enigmas, sentences, parables, reverses of medals, arms, blazons, cimiers, cyphers, and rebus," which learned discourse, be it observed, is entitled The Art of making Devises, 1646. As an additional proof that device included the motto, take the following:
"Henry III. commanded to be written by way of device in his chamber at Woodstock, 'Qui non dat quod amat non accipit ille quod optat;'"
quoted by Sir Eger. Brydges. Here I must stop, though I could add many illustrations; and go on to observe, that whereas all the explanations which I have ever met with, of the unique appellation of "Castrum Divisarum," or the castle of Devises, are totally un-historic, if not ridiculous, I crave the attention of all whom it may concern to a new solution of the difficulty.
First, then, in order to clear the way, I would observe, that if, as commonly stated, the name had signified a frontier fort, would it not have been called the castle of the division [singular] rather than the castle of the divided districts? In other words, why make it a plural term?
Secondly. If, as I surmise, the Italian word divisa bore at the time of the Conquest its present meaning of "device," in greater force than the
sense of divisions or partitions, is it unreasonable to suppose that Castrum Divisarum implied and constituted, at that early period, the deposit or fountain-head of the blazonry of the Norman leaders?