1. in_ernet_dli_2015_170389_2015_170389_Companion-To-English-History-middle-Ages

COMPANION

TO ENGLISH HISTORY

COMPANION

TO

ENGLISH

HISTORY

HENRY

FROWDE,

M.A.

PUBLISHER

TO

THE

UNIVERSITY

OF

OXFORD

LONDON,

EDINBURGH

NEW

YORK

ELIZABETHAN TOMBS OF PEYTON FAMILY, ISLEHAM CHURCH, CAMBS.

COMPANION TO

ENGLISH HISTORY

(MIDDLE AGES)

EDITED BY

FRANCIS PIERREPONT BARNARD, M.A., F.S.A.

WITH NINETY-SEVEN PLATES

OXFORD

AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

1902

λYRAMYERI 00# HCOWλ

OXFORD

PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

BY HORACE HART, M.A.

PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

PREFACE

Although this volume is designed primarily for higher educational purposes, it is believed that it will also prove of interest to the reading public at large.

The portion of history covered by the general scheme of the book is the medieval period. It being however manifestly impossible that every one of the twelve Sections, dealing as they do with topics so diverse, should be comprised between the same pair of fixed dates, it was arranged that the volume, as a whole, should begin with the English Conquest of Britain and end with the close of the sixteenth century; but that any special and important subject, or branch of a subject, which died out in the natural course of things before 1700, might be completed, if its completion were necessary or conducive to a clear understanding of it. There was little difficulty in establishing a uniformity of beginning except as regards Section IX, in which, owing to the Irish origin of the Christianity of Northern England, the account of monasticism had to be carried back to British times.

Here and there may be found a slight overlapping in several of the Sections; but this, apart from being unavoidable, will not be without its advantage in illustrating the connexion and interdependence of the matters treated. The concluding Section, too, is to some extent a summary of, and commentary upon, certain of the preceding chapters.

The courtesy of owners of drawings, blocks, or photographs, who have kindly placed them at my disposal is acknowledged particularly in the list of plates; but my

vi

PREFACE

especial thanks are due, either for this form of assistance or for help with the proof-sheets, to J. Wreghitt Connon, Esq., F.R.I.B.A.; R. C. Clephan, Esq., F.S.A.; C. H. Athill, Esq., F.S.A., Richmond Herald; the Rev. Dr. Greenwell, F.R.S., F.S.A.; the Rev. C. F. Routledge, F.S.A.; the Hon. Hugh St. Leger; W. T. Bensley, Esq., F.S.A. (Norfolk and Norwich Archaeological Society); W. J. Cripps, Esq., C.B., F.S.A.; and to each and all of my colleagues.

Most, however, of the illustrations have been specially drawn or photographed for the book, and all that could be made from the objects themselves have been so made.

Among the numerous public examinations, courses of study, and classes, to which the Companion to English History will probably be appropriate, may be mentioned the Oxford and Cambridge Higher and Senior Local Examinations, the Oxford and Cambridge Schools Certificate Examination, the University Extension Lectures, the National Home Reading Union, the higher forms in the First-grade Public Schools, and many University and College courses in Great Britain, the Colonies, and the United States of America.

F. P. B.

St. Mary's Abbey, Windermere.

CONTENTS

SECT.

PAGE

I. Ecclesiastical Architecture

The Rev. Arthur Galton, M.A., New Collcge, Oxford.

1

II. Domestic Architecture

J. A. Gotch, F.S.A., author of The Buildings of Sir Thomas Tresham, Architecture of the Renaissance in England, &c.

26

III. Military Architecture, and Art of War

C. W. C. Oman, M.A., F.S.A., Fellow of All Souls College, and Deputy Professor of Modern History, Oxford; author of The Art of War in the Middle Ages, &c.

53

IV. Costume, Military and Civil

A. Hartshorne, F.S.A., late editor of the Archaeological Journal ; author of Recumbent Monumental Effigies in Northamptonshire, The Sword-belts of the Middle Ages, Old English Glasses, &c.

90

V. Heraldry

Francis Pierrepont Barnard, M.A., F.S.A., late Head Master of Reading School. (Editor.)

116

VI. Shipping

M. Oppenheim, author of A History of the Administration of the Royal Navy.

158

VII. Town Life

Miss Lucy Toulmin Smith, Librarian of Manchester College, Oxford ; editor of Ricart's Kalendar, York Mystery Plays, and part-editor of English Gilds.

187

VIII. Country Life

George Townsend Warner, M.A., late Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge ; author of Landmarks of English Industrial History.

220

viii

CONTENTS

SECT.

PAGE

IX. Monasticism . . . . . . . . 242

The Rev. Augustus Jessopp, D.D., F.S.A., author of

The Coming of the Friars, One Generation of a Norfolk

House, &c.

X. Trade and Commerce . . . . 268

I. S. Leadam M.A., late Fellow of Brasenose College,

Oxford ; author of The Domesday of Inclosures, Select

Cases in the Court of Requests, Select Cases in the Star

Chamber, &c.

XI. Learning and Education . . . . 303

R. S. Rait, M.A., Fellow of New College, Oxford; author

of The Universities of Aberdeen : a History.

XII. Art . . . . . . . . 329

G. McN. Rushforth, M.A., F.S.A., Director of the British

School at Rome; late Lecturer of Oriel College, Oxford.

Glossary . . . . . . . . 353

Index . . . . . . . . 360

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Elizabethan tombs of Peyton family, Isleham Church. Frontispiece

(From photograph by R. H. Lord, Cambridge)

PAGE

Plate I. 1. Tower of Earls Barton Church. 2. Anglo-Saxon triangular-headed door. 3. Anglo-Saxon triangular-headed window. 4. Anglo-Saxon round-headed window. 5. Norman interior : Winchester Cathedral . . . . . 2

II. Norman piers, capitals, and ornaments . . . 2

III. Norman doors and windows . . . . 4

IV. Norman buttresses, arcades, and corbel-tables . 4

V. Various forms of the arch . . . . 6

VI. Early English doors and windows . . . 6

VII. Early English piers, capitals, and ornaments . 8

VIII. Early English buttresses, arcades, and corbel-tables . 8

IX. Early English spires and pinnacles . . 10

X. Development from geometric to flowing tracery . 10

XI. Lincoln Cathedral : external and internal views . 12

XII. Decorated doors and windows . . . 12

XIII. Decorated piers, capitals, and ornaments . 14

XIV. Decorated buttresses, arcades, and parapets . 14

XV. Perpendicular doors and windows . . . 16

XVI. Perpendicular piers, capitals, and ornaments . 16

XVII. Perpendicular buttresses, parapets, and arcade . 18

XVIII. 1. King-post roof. 2. Queen-post roof. 3. Hammer-beam roof. 4. Roof in hall of Eltham Palace, Kent 18

XIX. Fan vaulting and Elizabethan doorway . . 20

XX. 1. Tower and spire of Bloxham Church, Oxon. 2. Tower of Magdalen College, Oxford . . 20

XXI. Lincoln Cathedral : ground plan . . . 22

XXII. Kirkstall Abbey in 1190: ground plan. (Lent by J. Wreghitt Connon, Esq., F.R.I.B.A.) . . 24

x

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATE

XXII a. Conjectural restoration of Kirkstall Abbey as in 1190. (Lent by J. Wreghitt Connon, Esq., F.R.I.B.A.)

24

XXIII. Yanwith Pele, fourteenth century. (From photograph by Herbert Bell, Ambleside)

26

XXIV. 1. Oakham Castle Hall : exterior, c. 1180. (From Turner and Parker's Domestic Architecture.)

2. Oakham Castle Hall : interior. (Ibid.)

30

XXV. 1. Aydon Castle, late thirteenth century. (From Turner and Parker's Domestic Architecture.)

2. Aydon Castle : plans. (Ibid.)

32

XXVI. Haddon Hall, twelfth to sixteenth centuries

36

XXVII. 1. Haddon Hall : ground plan. (From Abbey Square Sketch Book.) 2. Oxburgh Hall, 1482 : ground plan. (From Britton's Architectural Antiquities)

38

XXVIII. Oxburgh Hall; gatehouse. (From Britton's Architectural Antiquities)

40

XXIX. 1. Compton Winyates, c. 1520. (From The Builder.)

2. Compton Winyates : ground plan. (From The Architectural Association Sketch Book)

42

XXX. 1. Audley End, 1603-16. (From Winstanley's Engravings of Audley End.) 2. Audley End : ground plan. (Ibid.)

44

XXXI. 1. Chastleton, c. 1603. (From Jaley's Architecture of the Renaissance in England.) 2. Chastleton : ground plan. (Ibid.)

48

XXXII. Wollaton Hall, 1580-8. (From Nash's Mansions of England)

50

XXXIII. 1. Keep of Norwich Castle: Norman. 2. Keep of Berkeley Castle : Norman

54

XXXIV. Château Gaillard, 1197 : ground plan. (From Viollet-le-Duc's L'Architecture Militaire)

56

XXXV. 1. Anglo-Saxon burh, Laughton-en-le-Morthen, Yorks.

2. Beaumaris Castle, c. 1300 : ground plan.

3. Beaumaris Castle : elevation. 4. Hooped cannon, fifteenth century.. 5. Bronze cannon, temp. Hen. VIII

58

XXXVI. Siege operations before gunpowder. (From Viollet-le-Duc's L* Architecture Milituire)

60

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PAGE

Assault from the siege-tower. (From Viollet-le-Duc's L'Architecture Militaire)

. . . 62

1. Curtain wall with brattices. (From Viollet-le-Duc's L'Architecture Militaire.) 2. Curtain wall with machicolation. (Ibid.)

. . . 64

XXXIX. 1. Tower and portion of a curtain. (From Viollet-le-Duc's L'Architecture Militaire.) 2. Battlements and machicolation of a tower. (Ibid.)

. . . 66

XL. 1. Plan of the Battle of Bannockburn. 2. Plan of the Battle of Crecy

. . . 68

XLI. 1. Plan of the Battle of Poictiers. 2. Plan of the Battle of Agincourt

. . . 70

XLII. Plan of the Battle of Flodden Field

. . . 82

XLIII. 1-5. Anglo-Saxon lozenge-shaped, leaf-shaped, oggee-shaped, barbed, and four-sided spear-heads. 6-8. Anglo-Saxon and Norwegian swords. 9. Anglo-Saxon bow, arrow, and quiver. 10. Norwegian axe. 11. Anglo-Saxon taper axe-head. 12. Anglo-Saxon bronze frame-helmet

. . . 90

XLIV. 1. Anglo-Saxon soldier. 2. English axe-man, 1066. 3. Norman archer, 1066. 4. Norman horseman, 1066. 5. King Edgar. 6. Effigy of Richard I. 7. Effigy of King John

. . . 92

XLV. 1. Brass of Sir John de Creke, c. 1325. 2. Brass of Ralph, Lord Stafford, 1347. 3. Brass of John Cray, Esq., c. 1390. 4. Brass of Sir Geo. Felbrigge, 1400. 5. Brass of . . . d'Eresby, c. 1410. 6. Brass of Sir John Lysle, c. 1420

. . . 94

XLVI. 1. Brass of Sir John Barnard, 1451. 2, 3. Effigy of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, c. 1454. 4. Brass of Thos. Peyton, Esq., 1484. 5. Suit of fluted armour, temp. Hen. VIII. 6. Brass of Humphrey Brewster, Esq., 1593

. . . 96

XLVII. 1. Effigy of Sir Denner Strutt, 1641. 2. English archer, fifteenth century. 3. Crossbowman, fifteenth century. 4. Hand-gun man, fifteenth century. 5. English archer, 1544. 6. English halberdier, 1544

. . . 98

XLVIII. 1. Civil costume, c. 1200. 2. Civil costume, temp. Edw. II. 3. Effigy of Wm. of Hatfield, second

xii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATE

PAGE

son of Edw. III. 4. Knight in civil costume, temp. Rich. II. 5. Gentleman in civil costume, early fifteenth century. 6. Richard III when Duke of Gloucester

. . . . . 100

XLIX. 1. Civil costume, temp. Hen. VII. 2. Portrait of Thos., Earl of Surrey, temp. Hen. VIII. 3. Portrait of Lord Russell of Thornhaugh, temp. Eliz. 4. Anglo-Saxon lady. 5. Lady of Norman period. 6. Effigy of Eleanor, queen of Hen. II

. . . . 102

L. Effigy of Aveline, Countess of Lancaster, d. 1273. 2. Brass of Lady Northwode, c. 1330. 3. Effigy of Blanche de la Tour, daughter of Edw. III, d. 1340. 4. Brass of lady of Clopton family, c. 1435. 5. Brass of Lady Curson, 1471. 6. Female costume, temp. Hen. VII.

. . . . 104

LI. 1. Brass of Matilda Grene, widow, 1462. 2 a, b. Head from effigy of Lady de Thorpe, c. 1420. 3. Brass of Ann Rede, 1577. 4. Horned head-dress, fifteenth century. 5. Heart-shaped head-dress, fifteenth century. 6. Turban head-dress, fifteenth century. 7. Hat of nobleman, fourteenth century. 8. Steeple-cap, fifteenth century. 9. Hat of gentleman, fourteenth century

. . . . 106

LII. 1. Head from effigy of Wm. Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, d. 1231. 2. Head from an effigy in the Temple Church, c. 1150. 3. Flat-topped cylindrical helm, with movable ventail, c. 1250. 4. Tilting helm of Sir Rich. Pembridge, d. 1375. 5. Bassinet with pointed vizor, c. 1400. 6. Head from effigy of Sir Robt. Goushill, c. 1425. 7. Head from brass of Sir Nich. Dagworth, 1401. 8. Head from brass of Lord Ferrers of Chartley, c. 1412. 9. Head from brass of Roger Elmbrygge, Esq., c. 1435. 10. Armet, c. 1450–80. 11. Sallad and Bavier, c. 1450–90. 12. Fluted close-helmet, c. 1510–25

. 108

LIII. 1. Burgonet with buffe, 1515–30. 2. Morion, temp. Elizabeth. 3. Cabasset, temp. Elizabeth. 4. Pot-helmet, temp. Great Civil War. 5. Lobster-tailed burgonet, temp. Great Civil War. 6. Neck and shoulders from brass of Rich. Quartremayns, c. 1460. 7. Neck and shoulders from brass of John Dengayn,

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

xiii

PLATE

PAGE

c. 1460. 8. Hips from brass of Roger Elmbrygge, Esq., c. 1435. 9. Lamboys, temp. Hen. VIII. 10. Almayne rivets, sixteenth century. 11. Specimen of studded armour from brass of Sir Miles Stapleton, 1364. 12. Figure of king from second great seal of Rich. I. 13. Figure of king from great seal of John

. . . . . . . . . . 110

LIII a. Tilting helm, late fifteenth century. (Lent by R. C. Clephan, Esq., F.S.A., in whose Defensive Armour and Weapons of Mediaeval Times will be found many excellent photographs of arms and armour) . 112

LIV. 1–17. Heraldic ordinaries. 18–23. Pre-armorial and early armorial shields . . . . . . . 120

LV. 1–15. Pre-armorial and early armorial shields (continued) 122

LVI. 1–10. Pre-armorial and early armorial shields (continued). 11. Transitional shield of Geoff. of Anjou, d. 1151, or of Patrick, Earl of Salisbury, slain 1168 (cp. Pl. LX, 4) . . . . . . . . 124

LVII. 1–5. Ancient methods of strengthening used in non-armorial shields, thirteenth to sixteenth centuries. 6. Shield from first great seal of Rich. I. 7. Arms of Monastery of St. Agatha. 8. Tincture points and hachures. 9. Example of tricking. 10. Arms of Sir Wm. Segar, Garter King of Arms, 1603–33 . 126

LVIII. 1–3. Arms of Howard, Manners, and Mowbray, augmented. 4. Arms of Hardres of Kent. 5. Arms of Kyrell of Kent. 6–8. Arms of Rumney, Orlanston, and Howlow, tenants of Kyrell. 9–19. Examples of conventional decorative shields. 20–23. The manche

. . . . . . . . . . 132

LIX. 1. Shield from effigy of John of Eltham, 1336. 2. Lion from Talbot banners, fifteenth century. 3. Seal of Thomas de Prayers, c. temp. Edw. II. 4. Seal of Seherus de Quenci, Earl of Winchester, temp. John

134

LX. 1. Window portrait of Margaret Peyton in armorial costume, c. 1485. 2. Brass of Elizabeth Shelley in armorial costume, 1526. 3. Window portrait of Anne, Countess of Stafford, in armorial costume, 1480. 4. Effigy of Wm. Longsword, Earl of Salisbury, d. 1226. 5. A King of Arms, fifteenth century. 6. Brass of . . . Bacon, c. 1320

. . . . . . . . . . 136

xiv

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATE

PAGE

LXI. 1. Incised slab of Sir John le Botiler, c. 1285. 2. Brass of Lady Willoughby d'Eresby, 1391. 3. Semi-effigial slab of Sir John Daubygne, 1346 .

138

LXI A. The Gökstadt boat, ninth century . . . .

160

LXII. 1. Ship of fifteenth century. 2-7. Evolution of the fore-castle. 8. Dry dock . . . . .

166

LXII A. The Tiger, 1546 . . . . . . .

170

LXIII. The Anne Gallant, 1546 . . . . .

178

LXIV. The Black Piness, 1587 . . . . .

182

LXV. Elizabethan man-of-war . . . . .

184

LXVI. 1. Mob Quadrangle, Merton College, Oxford. 2. Chamber Court, Winchester College . .

310

LXVII. 1. Charter of William I to London. 2. Specimen of Domesday Book . . . . .

322

LXVIII. 1. Advanced court hand, twelfth century. 2. Chaucer MS. . . . .

324

LXIX. 1. Anglo-Saxon font at Deerhurst. 2. Sepulchral cross of Acca, Bishop of Hexham, d. 740. (From Greenwell and Haverfield's Catalogue of the Inscribed and Sculptured Stones in the Library at Durham. By permission of Canon Greenwell) . .

330

LXX. Anglo-Saxon font at Bridekirk . . . .

330

LXX A. Anglo-Saxon ivory carving . . . .

332

LXXI. 1. Illumination from Cottonian psalter : Anglo-Saxon. 2. Illumination from the benedictional of Ethelwold : Anglo-Saxon . . . .

332

LXXII. Norman pillars in nave of Gloucester Cathedral. (From photograph by E. J. Neininger, Gloucester) .

334

LXXIII. 1. Wall painting at Canterbury : Norman. 2. Illumination from psalter in Royal MSS. : Norman

334

LXXIV. 1. Specimen of Norman stained glass at Canterbury. (From Williams' Notes on the Painted Glass in Canterbury Cathedral. By permission.) 2. Specimens of spandrels in Angel Choir, Lincoln Cathedral, thirteenth century. (From photograph by the Hon. Hugh St. Leger. By permission) .

336

LXXV. Subject from the Painted Chamber, Westminster, thirteenth century . . . . .

336

LXXVI. Tomb of Henry III in Westminster Abbey, thirteenth century

338

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATE

LXXVII. The Percy shrine in Beverley Minster, c. 1360. (From photograph by Messrs. Valentine & Sons, Dundee)

PAGE

. . . . . . 338

LXXVIII. Tomb of Edward II in Gloucester Cathedral, 1327. (From photograph by E. J. Neininger, Gloucester).

. . . . . . 340

LXXIX. Paintings from St. Stephen's Chapel, Westminster, fourteenth century

. . . . . . 340

LXXX. 1. Illumination from Queen Mary's psalter, early fourteenth century. 2. The Grandison triptych, fourteenth century

. . . . . . 342

LXXXI. Portion of reredos, Norwich Cathedral, fourteenth century. (From The Proceedings of the Norfolk and Norwich Archaeological Society. By permission)

. . . . . . 342

LXXXII. Dexter panel of the Wilton House diptych, c. 1380

344

LXXXIII. Specimen of St. John's heads, fifteenth century

344

LXXXIV. Window in choir of Tewkesbury Church, fourteenth century

. . . . . . 346

LXXXV. 1. Brass of Lady de Cobham, 1320. 2. Brass of Bishop Trillick, 1360. 3. Brass of John Mapilton, priest, 1432

. . . . . . 346

LXXXVI. The Syon cope, c. 1300

. . . . . . 348

LXXXVII. Screen at Bishop's Lydiard Church, fifteenth century. (From photograph by E. J. Nesbitt, 103 Earlsfield Road, London, S.W.)

. . . . . . 348

LXXXVIII. Fresco in Pickering Church, fifteenth century. (From photograph by Messrs. Boak & Sons, Pickering. By permission)

. . . . . . 350

LXXXIX. Altar piece, Gloucester Cathedral, c. 1550

. . . . . . 350

XC. Foundress's cup, Christ's College, Cambridge, c. 1440. (From Cripps' Old English Plate. By permission of W. J. Cripps, Esq., C.B.)

. . . . . . 352

XCI. Standing cup, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, sixteenth century. (From Cripps' Old English Plate. By permission of W. J. Cripps, Esq., C.B.)

. . . . . . 352

I

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

I. INTRODUCTORY.

Architecture, both word and thing, comes to us, through

the Latin architectura, from the Greek ἀρχιτέκτων, a master

builder. It means, literally, the master art, to which colouring

and carving are subordinated; and it implies an artistic method

of building, according to fixed principles. The term fixed,

however, like the term artistic, must not be applied to architec-

ture as a whole. There is a fixed science and practice of

architecture, which depends upon the rules of sound construction,

so far as they are influenced by the laws of nature, and by the

qualities of the material employed; but there is no fixed art in

building. The art in it must vary according to the different

styles; though each style must be true to its own principles

and laws. The excellencies of any style are to be measured

solely by its adherence to its own laws of beauty, of construction,

and of development. No style should ever be judged by

another or compared with another, favourably or unfavourably.

Every style, so far as it may be artistic and interesting, has its

own standards of right and wrong, by which alone it should

be measured; and its own sphere of activity or use, in which

alone it can be held to succeed or fail. Prehistoric monuments,

Egyptian, Assyrian, and other Oriental architectures, have

their various modes, their merits and their defects; but no sane

person compares them one with another. A similar modera-

tion or sanity is not always observed, as it should be, in discus-

sions about those later styles which we call Grecian, Roman,

or Gothic respectively. Ecclesiastical Gothic architecture

contains much that is very good, without having a monopoly

BARNAKD

B

2

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

of goodness, or an immunity from blemishes and blunders.

There is much that is no less good in its progenitors, in the

many generations of Grecian and Roman buildings. Never-

theless, the style of these buildings is very different from the

Gothic style ; and their several purposes were also different

from one another. 'Henceforth,' that is from the middle of

the fifth century, 'we shall find no forum, no public baths,

theatres, temples, or houses. All these forms disappear, and

for nearly 700 years, until the time when the Norman Castle

arose, well-nigh every building of architectual merit was in some

way or other ecclesiastical.'

Roman architecture is, beyond all doubt, the parent of

those buildings which we describe commonly and too loosely

as Gothic. The churches which were erected by Constantine

were modelled on the plan of the Basilicas or courts of justice,

and as the pagan civilization became extinct, disused temples

and other public buildings were appropriated to the uses of

Christian worship. When the Roman Empire in the West

of Europe was finally replaced by the kingdoms established by

the Northern invaders, the traditions of the Roman way of

building were continued, but in rude and debased forms. As

the Barbarians advanced in skill and fancifulness, their buildings

came to be more elaborate than the old Roman models. Roman

architecture, also made wanton by the Orientals, produced that

Byzantine style of which St. Mark's Church at Venice is the most

notorious example in Western Europe ; but various buildings

in the South of France show traces of the same influence.

Roman architecture, adapted and modified by the Western

Barbarians, produced the Romanesque style, as we see it in

the North of Italy and along the Rhine. This Romanesque

style is the only true and proper Gothic, if we employ the

word literally ; because it was the architecture of those Goths

and Longobards who conquered Italy, and adapted the

majestic Roman buildings to their own purposes and notions.

It is quite easy to see how the Imperial Basilica was turned

into the Romanesque church, and how this again was improved

into the Norman. The Romanesque or genuine Gothic style

began about the fifth century and, through its descendants, the

Plate I

1. TOWER. EARL'S BARTON CHURCH.

2. ANGLO-SAXON ROUND-HEADED WINDOW.

3. ANGLO-SAXON TRIANGULAR-HEADED DOOR.

4. NORMAN INTERIOR.

5. ANGLO-SAXON TRIANGULAR-HEADED WINDOW.

PLATE II

NORMAN PIERS.

NORMAN CAPITALS.

NORMAN ORNAMENTS

A.R. DROWN

PERIODS OF ARCHITECTURE

3

Anglo-Saxon and the Norman styles, it lasted until near the

middle of the twelfth, when the Pointed arch began to dis-

place the Round: and those various modes of Pointed archi-

tecture, which are described generally as Gothic, ran through

their natural developments; from the conventional stiffness

and thinness of the first Early English manner to the superb

and ordered freedom of Decorated Art. This perished, in the

end, of its own luxuriance, and passed into the stateliness of

the Perpendicular, which itself degenerated into a senile and

swelling pomposity, until the Pointed arch was curved again

into Roman shapes, or even flattened into the horizontal forms

of Grecian temples. Thus the art of building in Western

Europe returned in some degree towards the severe models

of its originators; though the pseudo-classical buildings of the

seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, especially in England,

cannot hide all traces of the experiences, experiments, and

emotions through which architecture had passed in the hands

of the medieval builders.

2. Periods of Architecture.

The technical portion of this essay is concerned only with

these medieval styles and variations as they appear in England;

and, before passing on to describe their forms, it will be service-

able to date them, or to divide them loosely into periods, to

which certain conventional names are attached.

1. Anglo-Saxon, from after . . . . . 600 to about 1050

2. Norman, from about . . . . . 1050 to about 1189

3. Early English, from about . . . . 1189 to about 1272

4. Decorated, from about . . . . . 1272 to about 1377

5. Perpendicular, from about . . . . 1377 to about 1550

(but instances are found as early as 1337).

It must be remembered that all these dates and periods are

approximate and not exact. The styles overlap and blend

more freely than any table can allow for. For this gradual

blending or merging of one style into another the phrase

B 2

4

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

Transition, or Transitional, is used. Particular buildings may

be in advance of the prevailing fashion, or behind it, according

to individual or local tastes ; but these divisions are accurate

enough to give us an historical notion of English architecture ;

and they enable us to date, within a narrow limit of time, any

building we meet with. There is no difference of style between

the English and the Continental mode of building, from the

seventh to the eleventh century, but only a difference of con-

structive and of decorative skill. The art and architecture of

the Northmen in Britain and in Gaul would be distinguished

more truly if we described them as Anglo-Scandinavian and

Franco-Scandinavian respectively. The builders in each country

were of Scandinavian blood : the differences between their

buildings were caused by the higher or the lower civilization,

by the finer or the poorer models, which the Romans had left

behind them in their provinces of Gaul and Britain.

It is impossible to say precisely when the Perpendicular

style merges into its latest form, which is commonly called

Tudor. We cannot give an exact date for the beginning of

this Transition ; but the earliest or English Tudor, as we may

call it, which is medieval in character, and is clearly a develop-

ment of Perpendicular, may be described as lasting until about

1570. After this date we find the later or Italian or Renaissance

Tudor, in which the classical sentiment prevails gradually over

the barbarian [Pl. xix, Elizabethan Doorway]. The change is

less marked in ecclesiastical than in domestic buildings, and

in funeral monuments. It tells us that we have left the Middle

Ages behind, with all their fashions and modes of thought ; and

that we have reached the fuller life of the Elizabethan and

Jacobean age. From the extravagances and grotesqueness of

these styles we pass to the correct and finer building of Inigo

Jones and Wren, in which details, construction, and sentiment

are all classical ; though these two artists always adapted the

teaching of their Italian masters to the spirit, the necessities,

the surroundings, and the comfortable traditions of English

architecture.

PLATE III

NORMAN DOORS.

WHEEL WINDOW.

NORMAN WINDOWS.

AR.BROWN

PLATE

IV

NORMAN

BUTTRESSES

NORMAN

ARCADES.

NORMAN

CORBEL-TABLES.

A.R.BROWN

ANGLO-SAXON

5

3. Anglo-Saxon.

There are few specimens left of unaltered Anglo-Saxon

buildings. Many, it is probable, were destroyed by the later

Scandinavian conquerors in the ninth and tenth centuries.

Others were destroyed by later architects. Such alterations are

described too commonly as improvements. Our own age has

the effrontery to call them restorations. The ravages of pirates

and marauders were less criminal and melancholy than too

many of our own exploits in architectural devastation. Anglo-

Saxon churches are small. They are rectangular or cruciform

in shape, and without aisles. A lofty square tower, without

buttresses, crowned sometimes with a low pyramidal roof, stands

either at the west end, or at the intersection of the nave and

transepts, if the church be cruciform. The walls are usually

of rubble or of small stones, coated with rough-cast or with

plaster. The corners of the building are both adorned and

strengthened with blocks of dressed stone, placed alternately in

short horizontal and in long upright layers. This is called

long and short work. It served as a tie or bond for the rubble

work. Ribs or strips of long and short work, generally squared,

but sometimes rounded, and projecting a few inches from the

surface of the wall, thus forming a rude pilaster, are found

placed vertically upon the building. String-courses of the same

kind run horizontally along the walls. These decorations give

the appearance of panelling in wood. Tiles are introduced

sometimes as a decoration, placed either horizontally or in a

herring-bone pattern. This was copied obviously from Roman

models. The windows were very small, generally with one

light, and are splayed equally inside and out, the wicker-work

or oiled parchment, that did duty in place of glass being thus

set in far enough to be protected from the weather. All

windows of later periods are narrower outside than at the

inner surface of the wall. Their tops are round, usually, and

occasionally triangular [Pl. I]. The doors match the windows,

but the triangular top is more common [Pl. I]. The arches

are round; and they are supported on pillars having some-

times a plain, square abacus, which is moulded or chamfered

6

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

in many instances. Windows are found in the towers, with

two lights, divided by squat and swelling balusters ; though

some of them are most graceful and classical in appearance.

Anglo-Saxon crypts are found below a few of our larger and

older churches. In some, as at Ripon, they are all that

remains to us of the earliest building. The crypt of Repton,

in Derbyshire, with its massive semicircular arches, its squared

and chamfered capitals, the raised spiral design of its columns,

and the fluted pilasters, is wonderfully Roman in detail and

sentiment.

The Anglo-Saxon style appears in its beginning to have

been the attempt of builders more accustomed to work in

wood than in stone to imitate such fragments of Roman building

as had survived the wars of conquest and settlement. With

more and finer models to copy, the continental Barbarians soon

developed the Romanesque or proper Gothic style, the parent

of the Norman. Our own forefathers before the tenth century,

with poorer models, and with no skilled labour at their command,

only achieved the Anglo-Saxon style, the rudest daughter of the

Roman ; and, as it would appear, they built at first more com-

monly in wood than in stone. None of these wooden buildings

remain to us, except possibly the nave of Greenstead Church

in Essex ; but the style of decoration and construction proper

to wood was continued and reproduced by the earliest builders

when stone had come to be substituted for it. Hence, no

doubt, the ribs, the string-courses, and the reminiscence of

panelling upon the walls ; and, it may be, the long and short

work at the corners : all of them suggesting wattle and dab or

lath and plaster in a framework of wooden beams. The most

interesting details which remain of this style are to be found

in some of the church towers. Of these, perhaps, the finest

and most interesting is at Earl’s Barton [Pl. I]. The detail

of this tower gives us the clear impression of a design made

originally for wood, and copied into stone ; in other words,

it is the design of a carpenter executed by a mason. The

parapet is comparatively recent ; the tower probably terminated

in a pyramidal roof. At a later period the mouldings of Anglo-

Saxon architecture were elaborated, and the whole scheme of

Plate V

1 TRIANGULAR-HEADED ARCH

2 SEMICIRCULAR ARCH

3 STILTED ARCH

4 SEGMENTAL ARCH

5 HORSE-SHOE ARCH

6 LANCET ARCH

7 EQUILATERAL ARCH

8 OBTUSE ANGLE ARCH

9 POINTED TREFOIL ARCH

10 ROUND-HEADED TREFOIL ARCH

11 FOUR CENTRED TUDOR ARCH

12 SQUARE-HEADED TREFOIL ARCH

AR BROWN

PLATE VI

EARLY ENGLISH DOORS.

EARLY ENGLISH WINDOWS.

decoration was more obviously designed for stone. Animals

and other figures in low relief are found sculptured on capitals,

and on the tympana of doorways. We read of glass, of metal

work, and of musical instruments being brought into England ;

as well as of masons and decorators from abroad. About the

middle of the eleventh century we find Normans established

in English bishoprics and abbeys, and in Edward the Con-

fessor a semi-Norman king reigning at Westminster. Under

their patronage Norman building was introduced ; and through

this artistic and political Transition we pass to the Conquest,

and to the establishment among us of an Anglo-Norman style.

4. Norman.

This great style was developed by that race or polity of the

Barbarians which had most affinity of spirit with the Romans.

It is found in Normandy itself, in England, in Italy and Sicily ;

wherever these magnificent conquerors and rulers established

themselves, and left their mark. It exhibits the strength, the

massiveness, the exuberant vigour, and that stern genius for

order, which were among the endowments of this aristocratic

and splendid race. Franco-Scandinavian architecture resembled

the Anglo-Scandinavian in form and style, differing from it only

in superior size, and skill, and richness, for the reasons which

have been suggested. The earliest Norman work in England,

as the transepts of Winchester [Pl. i], is almost as plain as

Anglo-Saxon ; and the Confessor's own abbey church at West-

minster was probably of a similar design. The style soon

became richer and more decorative, perhaps through oriental

influences due to the Crusades. The activity of the Norman

builders and conquerors is amazing. All the cathedrals and

greater churches, which existed in the eleventh century, were

rebuilt and many others were founded. One hundred and ninety-

five religious houses were built under the Conqueror and his sons

in the seventy years of their three reigns. The abbey church

at Romsey and the cathedral at Peterborough show us the scale

of Norman monasteries. The Norman churches are larger

and higher than the Anglo-Saxon. Their vaults and arches

8

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

have a much greater height and span. In shape they are

generally cruciform, with a square tower at the intersection of

the nave and transepts. These towers are low and massive.

They usually contain windows with two lights. The solemn

plainness of the exterior is relieved sometimes in the higher

storeys by blank arcades. They are surmounted occasionally

by a low pyramidal roof of tile or stone ; and out of this grew

the tall Early English spire, through the stunted spires of the

Transition. The nave is usually flanked by two aisles, which

are often continued through the transepts along the sides of

the choir. The choir ends in many cases with a semicircular

apse. This was derived from the place and shape of the

tribune, or magisterial bench, in Imperial Basilicas. From the

rows of columns dividing a Basilica we may also trace the origin

of the nave and aisles in the Romanesque and Norman

churches. When this mode became conventional in the later

styles, and its true origin was forgotten, mystical or whimsical

reasons were assigned for the internal form of churches. The

interior wall-spaces of the nave, in the bigger churches, are

divided into three storeys or stages, separated from one another

by horizontal courses [Pl. I]. The ground storey consists of

wide, round arches resting on piers or massive pillars [Pl. II].

In the second storey or triforium are usually two smaller

arches, resting at their spring on piers, divided and supported

in the middle by a single column, and the whole enclosed

within a bigger arch, corresponding to the arch of the nave

below. The triforium, called blind storey, because it gave no

light, opened usually into a space between the roof and vaulting

of the aisles. The uppermost stage, or clerestorey, has two and

sometimes three semicircular arches, resting on pillars, and

divided from one another by single columns. If there be three

arches, the middle arch alone is pierced through, and forms a

window. The entire division thus constituted a bay. The

clerestorey, that is the open or pierced storey, is higher than

the roof of the aisles, and so afforded a means of lighting the

nave from the top [Pl. I]. Norman roofs are semicircular,

either of stone vaulting or of wood, or of flat wood, as at

Peterborough. Norman piers and mouldings may be studied

PLATE VII

EARLY ENGLISH PIERS.

EARLY ENGLISH CAPITALS.

TOOTH ORNAMENT.

DRIPSTONE TERMINATIONS

CROCKET.

DIAPER WORK

EARLY ENGLISH ORNAMENTS.

AR.BROWN.

PLATE VIII

EARLY ENGLISH BUTTRESSES.

EARLY ENGLISH ARCADES.

EARLY ENGLISH CORBEL TABLES.

AF BROWN.

NORMAN

9

in Pl. ii. The classical patterns in some of the later Norman

work should be noticed carefully. Early Norman windows

are mere slits in the outer wall, but splayed. The massive

walls and towers, and the small windows, which we find until

the last quarter of the twelfth century, bear witness to the

rudeness and violence of those ages, when churches could be

used as fortresses, or as places of refuge. The heads of Norman

windows [Pl. iii] are usually round, though pointed sometimes

in later work. Later windows have their heads and hoods

moulded with chevrons, billets, &c., resting on angle-shafts

with cushion capitals, a string-course running below the sills

and forming a horizontal decoration. The blank spaces of the

walls are relieved perpendicularly by pilaster buttresses, more

for ornament than for use, the massive walls with their hard

concrete cores requiring no prop [Pl. iv]. A more elaborate

effect was given by blank arcades, with interlacing arches, and

circular windows added to this effect, balancing the arches.

Such windows were small and plain at first, mere circles ; then

they were made larger, and were richly sculptured, and the

circles were divided by radiating pillars or shafts, one of the

earliest forms of tracery [Pl. iii]. More elaborate than the

windows are the Norman doors and porches. These are

boldly and curiously sculptured with rude but most effective

designs [Pl. iii]. The inside of the church is usually plain,

except the chancel arch, upon which the Norman sculptors

lavished the whole of their resources; partly, no doubt, for

the effect, this arch being a kind of inner portal or porch,

leading to the holy place. Normal detail and ornament will

be understood better from the illustrations than from any

description in words [Plates ii; iv]. It need only be said

that a corbel is a sculptured stone, projecting to support a

weight. A row of corbels, supporting a parapet or cornice, is

known as a corbel-table. The characteristics of the Norman

style are massiveness of construction ; round arches ; big round

pillars, occasionally incised spirally or with zigzags ; cushion or

other capitals often almost classical in design ; and bold, rude,

but lavish and effective sculpture, done in a broad freehand style.

Thin imitations of Norman, mathematically exact and stiff, are

10

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

the most offensive of all our so-called restorations. Norman

carving was probably thrown into relief by brilliant and strongly

contrasting pigments. In the interlacing arcades, of which we

have spoken [Pl. iv], pointed arches are formed by the inter-

section of the round arches ; and the effect thus gained has

been imagined by some antiquaries to be the origin of the

Pointed style. Others have derived the Pointed arch from

Eastern or Moorish influences, which they attribute to the

Crusades ; and this view is not incompatible with dates. To

these oriental influences, perhaps, we should attribute the

luxuriant decoration of the later Norman. Whatever the cause,

the massive round arches of the Norman builders became

lighter in the twelfth century, and were gradually pointed. The

two styles merge into one another through the Transition of

Henry II. The architecture of this period of transition, which

is of singular charm and interest, may be seen at Canter-

bury in its highest perfection. It may be studied with great

advantage at Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford, where the capitals

are most suggestive. The fragments of the ruined chapel of

Joseph of Arimathea, at Glastonbury, are exceedingly beautiful;

and so we pass on to the Early English, often spoken of by

ecclesiologists as the Lancet, Geometrical, or First Pointed style.

In Plate v are given different forms of the arch. In the

round arch, if the centre be level with the spring, we have

a semicircle : if below the spring, a segmental arch : if above

the spring, a stilted arch, or a horse-shoe, according to whether

the continuation be straight or curved. The Lancet arch is

formed over the two sides of an imaginary isosceles triangle.

The Equilateral arch is formed upon the proportions of an

equilateral triangle.

5. Early English.

The Lancet or First Pointed style is very simple in character,

and in the beginning was very plain. The arches, doors, and

windows are of a Lancet form. Tall and slender spires were

added to the square towers of the Normans. The buttresses

grew out from the walls, and then developed into the flying

Plate IX

EARLY ENGLISH SPIRES.

EARLY ENGLISH PINNACLES.

AR.BROWN

PLATE X

THE DEVELOPMENT

FROM GEOMETRIC TO FLOWING TRACERY.

AR BROWN.

buttress. Both these changes were made necessary by the

weakness and thinness of the walls, which could not resist the

outward thrust of the high roofs. Mouldings were decorated

with crockets and finials in conventional designs of foliage,

sculptured on their upper surfaces ; and the tops of buttresses

were drawn up into long pinnacles. The solid Norman piers

were replaced by clusters of small, cylindrical and often de-

tached banded shafts, of dark Portland or Purbeck marble,

which stood out, in form and colour, against the paler central

stone pier. This contrast of dark and white in colour is repeated

in the deep, curved sculpture of the mouldings, with their con-

trasts of light and shade. The ornamentation is conventional

and stiff. Blank wall spaces are relieved by carvings in diaper

work. Plates vi, vii, viii, and ix show the details and character

of the Lancet style. The characteristics of it are the Lancet arch,

the bell capital, the conventional foliage, the dog-tooth ornament.

Plate vi shows Early English doorways, and also how the

single Lancet window was doubled, and pierced above the

lancets with trefoil or quatrefoil openings. These piercings,

or plate-traceries, led at first to the geometrical designs of the

complete Pointed style, in which equilateral and trefoiled arches

replace the simpler Lancet ; and then the upper mullions were

developed into the free and more elaborate tracery used by the

Decorated artists. Salisbury Cathedral is the largest and most

uniform example of the Lancet style. The choir of Worcester

is a noble specimen. Lincoln is a rich example of the more

complete geometrical style of the thirteenth century [Pl. xi].

6. Decorated.

The Geometrical Pointed was developed very gradually into

the Decorated style, through the Transition of Edward I. Both

styles have the equilateral a ch ; but the distinction between

them is always unmistakable when we can judge by mouldings

and ornamentation. The tracery of the windows, but more

particularly the mouldings, afford the surest evidence of the

Decorated style. As the arches became broader, mullions or

vertical bars of masonry were required for their support,

12

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

dividing the windows into lights; and they were turned by

the Decorated artists into the beautiful and flowing tracery

of that style, which has given its name of Curvilinear or

Flowing to the Middle Pointed or Decorated Architecture,

as distinguished from the Geometrical and First Pointed style.

The evolution from plate-tracery, in which a flat surface is

pierced, as in the first illustration on Plate x. to bar-tracery

is curious and instructive. The magnificence and beauty

of these windows are its chief characteristic. Round or

rose windows appear again [Pl. xii], and they must be dis-

tinguished from the wheel or shafted radiating windows of

the Normans [Pl. iii]. The Decorated piers, if clustered, are

usually not detached as was commonly the case in Early

English; but very often they are flat-faced and octagonal

[Pl. xiii]. The capitals are generally octagonal or bell-shaped.

The ornamentation of the capitals is more free and realistic

than in Early English, and more rich than the Perpendicular

[Pl. xiii]. The characteristic ornament is the ball flower or

cup and flower [Pl. xiii], which may be triangular or square in

form, with four petals or with three. The vaulting is elaborate

and skilful, with an almost infinite variety of ribs and groining.

Sedilia, the carved and canopied seats for the sacrificing clergy,

are found in the south side of the chancel walls. Pierced and

sometimes battlemented parapets, at the junction of the walls

and the roof, are also characteristic of this style, and replace

the stiff corbel-tables of the previous builders [Pl. xiv]. The

gargoyles, or grotesque gutter-spouts, in the shape of men and

monsters pouring water from their mouths, are a noticeable

feature. Crockets and finials become more numerous and rich

as the style advances, and the diapers freer and more elaborate

[Pl. xiii]. The buttresses are ornamented with niches and

figures, or with panels [Pl. xiv]. The flying buttresses are

both ingenious and beautiful. The spires of this period are ot

remarkable size and beauty [Pl. xx, 1]. The workmanship and

designs of this century are superior to those of any other.

Decorated is, in Pointed architecture, the supreme effort and

culmination, to which the Lancet style had led up, and from

which the Perpendicular declined. It is to be seen in great

Plate XI

EXTERNAL VIEW

INTERNAL VIEW

AR BROWN

PLATE XII

DECORATED DOORWAYS.

DECORATED WINDOWS.

ART BROWN

beauty and perfection at Exeter and Wells, and on a larger scale at York. The western front of York is, assuredly, among

the chief architectural glories of our island. This style was literally killed in the end by the excesses of its own perfection,

or by the exuberant facility of its artists.

7. Perpendicular.

The Perpendicular style, in its beginning, and in the hands of Wykeham, was no doubt the healthy and ordered protest

of a genius against the defects and excesses of the later Decorated. But, as Professor Willis pointed out, the origin

of this style is to be found at Gloucester as early as 1337, where the Norman work was overlaid with a veil of extra-

ordinary Perpendicular, paid for by offerings at the tomb of Edward II, so that the grave of a king became the cradle

of a new architectural fashion. The windows, as usual, serve best to distinguish between the styles. As the windows become

broader, the arch is flattened: as they become larger, the mullions are lengthened, until they reach without a break

from the sill to the head of the arch, thus cutting and narrowing the more flowing Decorated tracery [Pl. xv]. From

these long upright mullions the Perpendicular style is named. As the style develops, the mullions are crossed by horizontal

bars, or transoms; and these are intersected again by smaller mullions, which multiply the number of lights above. These

smaller lights are united under the great arch of the window by separate arches formed out of the tracery. We have the

effect of a big window separated into vertical sections and subdivided into panels. So large do the windows become at

last, that instead of masonry and wall spaces we find a mere line of buttresses, which support a roof, and frame vast areas of

coloured glass. As the style develops, round windows are replaced by square, windows and doors both incline to be

square-headed, or to be square-hooded [Pl. xv]. The piers in this style have thin, plain shafts. The capitals are octagonal or

circular, either chamfered or with poor carving. The bases are

14

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

often very tall, so that the shafts begin at some height from the

ground. Sometimes, instead of a shaft distinct from the base

and capital, the column is moulded or panelled in one sweep

of design, from its base to the head of the arch [Pl. xvi].

The characteristic ornamentation of Perpendicular [Plates xvi ;

xvii] is the panelling, which replaces the diaper, and often

covers the whole surface of the walls. The windows, too, give

the effect of coloured panels. Badges and heraldic bearings are

favourite decorations ; especially the Tudor badges, the Port-

cullis and the Rose, and the so-called Tudor-flower [Pl. xvi].

Shields, either alone or supported by angels, are common, and

give a dignified effect. The flatter roofs of this period corre-

spond with the broader and lower pitch of the arches ; and

wooden roofs of magnificent construction and design have come

down to us. They are of three kinds: flat, and with square

panels ; open, and of higher pitch ; and groined. All three

sorts are carved elaborately. The highest achievement in

wooden roofs is the hammer-beam construction, such as that of

Westminster Hall. The plans of wooden roofs given in Pl. xviii

explain the construction far better than any account in words.

The stone roofs of this period are fine, and the most charac-

teristic form is the fan vaulting [Pl. xix], to be seen in Henry

VII's chapel at Westminster. This graceful vaulting helps to

relieve the flatness of Perpendicular roofs and arches. Beautiful

wooden screens were made in the Perpendicular style ; either

chancel screens, dividing the nave and choir [Pl. lxxxvii],

called also rood screens, because the great rood or crucifix

was placed on or over them ; or screens dividing chapels and

tombs from the open church. The finest work of the Perpen-

dicular artists was done in wood, which was their true material.

All the panelling that we see at Westminster and King's

College Chapel in Cambridge suggests a mistaken effort to

produce in stone effects which can only be obtained satisfactorily

and lawfully in wood. Hence, it may be, the feeling of weakness

which is conveyed by the latest Perpendicular buildings, in spite

of their size and richness. Perpendicular porches are numerous

and large. They are panelled usually, and often have groined

or fan vaultings. A room, with a characteristic window, is

PLATE XIII

DECORATED PIERS.

DECORATED CAPITALS

DECORATED ORNAMENTS.

BALL FLOWER

DRIPSTONE TERMINATION

FINIAL AND CROCKETS

DIAPER WORK.

CORBEL HEAD.

A.P.B.

PLATE XIV

DECORATED BUTTRESSES.

DECORATED ARCADES.

DECORATED PARAPETS.

AR BROWN.

introduced sometimes between the vaulting and the roof, and

communicating only with the church. These rooms may have

been used as libraries. Some antiquaries think they were used

by recluses or anchorets, who were cut off entirely from human

intercourse. Some of them contain fireplaces and other necessary

conveniences for students or devotees. The doorways [Pl. xv]

of this style are florid and elaborate. Buttresses [Pl. xviI] and

the masonry of doors and windlows are filled with niches, contain-

ing figures : this form of decoration was suggested obviously by

panelling. Towers, for the most part, take the place of spires.

Throughout many districts they are numerous and fine, even in

the country churches. The number and size of the Perpen-

dicular churches are amazing, especially in small country

parishes. The Perpendicular builders, no doubt, gave us much,

but they were horribly destructive, especially to the roofs and

windows of their predecessors. Even the grandeur and spacious-

ness of Wykeham's nave at Winchester hardly atone for the loss

of the Norman piers and arches that are buried in it. The

Perpendicular style is adapted equally for ecclesiastical and

domestic purposes. For this reason it has been used effectively

for colleges and monasteries. In its general effects it manages

to blend stateliness with a homely and comfortable air. It is

thoroughly English and practical in its capabilities and appear-

ance. Magdalen tower in Oxford [Pl. xx, 2] may be named as

one of the most beautiful specimens of Perpendicular: as it is

one of the latest examples, before the Tudor, being attributed by

some authorities to Wolsey in his early manhood, it stands

literally 'whispering' to us 'with ineffable charm' 'the last

enchantments of the middle age'; and so it may well and

worthily close our description of the medieval styles.

8. Interior Arrangement of Churches.

In Plate xxi a plan is given of Lincoln Cathedral. This will

not only convey to the reader some notion of the form and

ground-plan of the bigger churches, but will enable him to

follow the account of their interior arrangement and uses.

The public entrance to a church was through the porch.

16

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

This was placed usually on the southern, more rarely on the

northern side, and generally one bay towards the east, so as to

leave a window to the west of it. Sometimes there is a porch

on either side. In many churches, however, the entrance is

through a western door, or by a kind of porch made in the

tower. Sometimes the west entrance is enlarged into a sort of

ante-chapel, and is called a galilee. There is a fine specimen at

Durham, and a smaller at Ely. The galilee at Lincoln is on the

western side of the south transept. In the porch was

almost invariably a stoup for holy water, into which those

entering dipped their fingers, and crossed themselves. The

churching of women and parts of the baptismal and marriage

services used to be read in the porch. The font was generally

placed at the west end of the nave or aisles, near the chief

entrance. There remain fonts of every date, and shape, and

style, from Norman onwards. Spires and towers are almost

invariably at the west end of the nave. Towers were used not

only for defensive purposes in the border counties, but also as

beacons or landmarks in districts near the coast. They were

provided sometimes with cressets for the beacon lights. The

bells which hung in them were used for the curfew and other

public warnings, as well as for ecclesiastical purposes. Bells

were used in Anglo-Saxon times, but there are few existing

bells older than the fourteenth century. Medieval bells are

usually inscribed with their names and dates. They were

consecrated or christened with water and holy oil. Besides

the great bells in the tower, there was generally, after the

thirteenth century, a small sacring or sanctus bell, which was

rung at the elevation of the host and chalice, and at other

solemn parts of the mass. It hung in a small open arch or

bell-cote, placed on the roof at the junction of the nave and

chancel. The earliest seats were banks of masonry, fixed along

the walls, and forming stone benches. Wooden seats or pews

are seldom found of an earlier date than the fourteenth century.

In the fifteenth, churches seem to have been generally and

systematically pewed with low, open seats. The panels and

mouldings were often richly carved; and the ends were

developed into bold and elaborate finials, which were occa-

PLATE XV

PERPENDICULAR DOORWAYS.

PERPENDICULAR WINDOWS.

AR BROWN.

PLATE XVI

PERPENDICULAR PIERS.

PERPENDICULAR CAPS.

PERPENDICULAR PANELS.

TUDOR FLOWER

SHIELD A

AR BROWN.

INTERIOR ARRANGEMENT OF CHURCHES

17

sionally armorial in design. In the Western counties the

carving of the bench-ends was on the solid, while in East

Anglia and the Midlands the construction was of a higher

class, in which the rails, panels, &c. were inserted, the buttresses

alone being on the solid. Pulpits are not common of an

earlier date than the fifteenth century, when their form and

position appear to have become more settled. Before this,

they may have been movable and temporary structures.

Ancient pulpits, whether of stone, or wooden, are moulded

and carved elaborately in the style of their period. They

stood usually in the eastern part of the nave. Outside pulpits

were in use, as at Paul's Cross. There is a beautiful specimen

at Magdalen College in Oxford. From the thirteenth century

onwards, the chancel was usually divided from the nave by

a stone or wooden screen, which replaced the elaborate chancel

arch of the Normans, and the veil which used to divide the

clergy from the Christian people. There are innumerable

specimens of fifteenth and sixteenth century screens in wood.

The rood loft was a platform or passage, above the screen,

extending across the chancel, and connected with a staircase,

made either in a turret or in the thickness of the wall. When

there was no loft above the screen, the apex or crest supported

the rood or crucifix, and the attendant figures of Mary and John.

Sometimes the rood hung from a beam which was placed across

the chancel arch. Roods are not earlier than the eleventh

century. The roods themselves became very large and realistic

towards the close of the Middle Ages ; and the implements of

the crucifixion were added to them. Candles were lit before

them on certain days, and it would seem that there was an altar

and a piscina occasionally in the rood loft. The choir or chancel,

within the screen, was furnished on either side with wooden

stalls, often canopied, and divided by arms or carving into

single seats. These were occupied by the canons of cathedral

or collegiate churches, and by the monks or friars of conventual

foundations. The benches or formulae of these seats are

movable on hinges, and the undersides or subsellia are carved

with grotesque or satirical designs and figures. These movable

seats are called misericords. When turned down, they formed

BARNARD

C

18

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

an ordinary and proper seat during the time for sitting in

the various offices and liturgies: the edges of them, when

they were turned up, were used as a kind of irregular seat

or ledge, on which the monks or canons rested at those times

when they should have stood. The arms or divisions between

the stalls were also used as props for the elbows. In front of

the stalls were desks of carved and panelled woodwork. The

deans of cathedrals, the heads of chapters, and the superiors of

religious houses usually sat on the inner side of the rood screen,

facing the altar. The capitular or conventual body sat facing

one another on the north and south of the choir. Lecterns and

reading desks, of wood or metal, often stood in the middle of the

choir, for the reading of lessons and the singing of antiphons.

Reading desks in the modern sense placed for congregational

use are very rare before the sixteenth century. After seeing

the misericords, a visitor would come to the high altar, the

principal altar in a church. It was raised usually on three

steps. The most ancient altars were of wood. In later times

stone was used. The altar stone, or flat slab on the top, was

consecrated with oil, and incised with five crosses, symbolical

of Christ's five wounds. Consecration crosses are also found

on the inside and outside walls of churches. Relics were

enclosed in the altar stone, from the primitive custom of

celebrating mass at the tombs of martyrs, and in theory every

altar was a shrine or tomb. The furniture of altars was very

simple at first, consisting only of the cup or chalice, the plate or

paten, the altar linen, and the service book. There were neither

crosses nor candles. These came into use in the thirteenth

century, after transubstantiation had been defined, and ritual

was elaborated to express the new belief. Before the Reforma-

tion, only two altar candles appear to have been used in England.

In the fifteenth century, the figure was added to the simple

cross as a liturgical decoration of the altar. Besides the furniture

mentioned, there was a covered chalice, or ciborium, or pyx, for

the distribution, and in later ages for the reservation, of the

sacramental bread; a pair of cruets for the wine and water;

a small sacring hand-bell; a pax table, of silver usually, for the

kiss of peace; a stoup or other vessel, with a sprinkler, for holy

PLATE XVII

PERPENDICULAR BUTTRESSES.

PERPENDICULAR PARAPETS.

PERPENDICULAR ARCADE.

AR.BROWN.

Plate XVIII

1 & 2.

A KING-POST

B QUEEN-POST

C BRACES.

D TIE-BEAMS

E PRINCIPAL RAFTERS

F RIDGE PIECES.

G PURLINS.

H COLLAR.

J COMMON-RAFTBRS.

K POLE-PLATES

L WALL-PLATES.

1 KING-POST ROOF.

A HAMMER-BEAM.

B PENDANT-POST

C HAMMER-BRACE.

P RAFTER.

E COLLAR

F SIDE-POST

G COLLAR-BRACE

H UPPER-COLLAR.

2 QUEEN-POST ROOF.

3 HAMMER BEAM ROOF

AR BROWN.

INTERIOR ARRANGEMENT OF CHURCHES 19

water; a censer or thurible for burning incense, and a boat for

holding it, with a spoon for measuring it out. The cylindrical

monstrance, or glazed pyx, for exhibiting the sacrament on altars

and in processions was probably not used earlier than the

fourteenth century. The service of benediction, for which the

present flat monstrance is used, was not established in the Roman

Church until after the Reformation. All furniture and vessels,

in whatever material, corresponded with the style of architecture

and ornamentation that was in fashion when they were made.

In the south wall of the chancel, near the altar, are found the

stone seats or sedilia, already mentioned, one, three, or five in

number, generally three, and generally with seats of graduated

levels for clergy of different ranks. East of the sedilia was

a fenestrella or niche, containing the piscina or lavacrum, a

bason with a drain leading into the earth, down which the

ablutions of the priests' fingers and the rinsings of the chalice

were poured. Within the niche of the piscina, and over the

bason, was often a shelf to hold the cruets, which were also

placed sometimes on a separate shelf, or credence table. Ambries

or lockers, which have had folding or single doors, are found in

some chancel walls. They were used for holding the relics and

eucharistic vessels, and also for the chrismatories or vials in

which the three sorts of holy oil were kept; the oil of cate-

chumens, the oil for the sick, and the holy chrism. Besides

the high altar, there were often smaller altars in side chapels,

and in other parts of the big churches. The side chapels were

commonly shut off from the open church by screens of wood or

stone. These chapels were often chantries, that is foundations,

quite independent of the parochial revenues, endowed by par-

ticular persons or families, in order that masses should be said

or sung for their souls. Chantry priests lived on the endow-

ment, and performed the duties ordered by the bequest. The

beautiful tomb of Arthur, Prince of Wales, at Worcester, is an

example of a chantry chapel erected and endowed within a

church. Large revenues were left to the collegiate and con-

ventual foundations for these purposes; and their churches

were enriched financially, as well as architecturally, by the

chantries and tombs of benefactors. The earliest tombs are

C 2

20

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

stone coffins, with flat covers level with the floors. Then the

top is coped, and raised slightly above the floor, as in the tomb

of Rufus at Winchester. After this, the base of the tomb rests

on the floor; and then it was not long before simple figures of

the dead were sculptured on the top, as in the case of John's

effigy [Pl. xliv, 7] at Worcester, which is now set upon a

Perpendicular tomb of the fifteenth or early sixteenth century,

and in the ruder carving of Peter des Roches at Winchester.

In the monument of William Longsword [Pl. lx, 4], at Salisbury,

we have a tomb and an effigy which are coeval. From the middle

of the thirteenth century onwards, we have elaborate effigies of

men and women, giving the costumes of their time; and, in the

canopies or arches over them, as well as in the detail and con-

struction of their monuments, telling us the century in which they

lived. Another form of monument is the brass [Plates lxi, 2;

lxxxv], either on raised stone tombs, or more commonly on the

floor, giving the figure and costume of the deceased; and yet

another form is the less durable incised slab [Pl. lxi, 1]. Further

details about sepulchral monuments belong more properly to the

articles on armour, costume, and heraldry. The humbler and

uncoffined dead were put into the churchyards; and their bones,

as they accumulated, were often gathered in vast quantities into

the crypts or charnel-houses below the church. The churches

themselves were bright with colour. The walls were frescoed

with patterns and sacred subjects. Vaulting and wood-carving

were usually painted and gilt, oak not being in medieval times

valued for its own sake as at the present day. The windows were

still more brilliant and rich. Glass appears to have been used

as early as the seventh century. Benedict Biscop, at Wear-

mouth, imported glass-makers after 678, and Wilfrith glazed the

windows at York Minster before 686. No earlier instances are

recorded. Another Wilfrith, at Worcester, who held that see

from 717 to 744, substituted glass for the wooden shutters and

lattices of wicker-work, and its transparency—for the moon

and the stars could be seen through it—caused much wonder,

and supernatural agency was suspected. The glass at Wear-

mouth and York was doubtless cast-glass, or table-glass, which

was made by merely pouring the material upon a marble table,

PLATE XIX

FAN VAULTING

ELIZABETHAN DOORWAY

A.R.BROWN

PLATE XX

1. TOWER AND SPIRE OF BLOXHAM

CHURCH, OXON.

2. TOWER OF MAGDALEN COLLEGE,

OXFORD.

INTERIOR ARRANGEMENT OF CHURCHES

21

and was smooth on one side and rough on the other. Thus it

was translucent, but not transparent like that at Worcester, the

latter marking the advance that had been made in the manu-

facture during the intervening half century. From the end of

the twelfth, we have coloured glass in patterns and rude figures ;

and then we find the splendid glass of the Decorated and

Perpendicular windows, in which the designs are fitted so

exquisitely to the traceries, and all the detail agrees with its

own style of architecture. Some of the patterned windows of

the fourteenth century are of a rare delicacy; and the clear

white and gold of the fifteenth has a magical and charming

effect. The scheme of design and colour was completed by

the tiling of the floors. Vestments do not belong properly to

our subject, nor do the various hangings and embroideries of

altars ; but the general sumptuousness of churches was in-

creased by every kind of tapestry and needle-work, which were

made still more costly and impressive by a lavish use of gold,

of silver, and of precious stones. Shrines and statues, reliquaries

of strange and barbaric shapes, which imitated the human limbs

and members contained in them, rings, mitres, croziers, pectoral

and processional crosses, maces and staves, bells and candle-

sticks and censers, the covers of books, bowls and ewers,

chalices and flagons, and other gorgeous implements of ritual,

made of gold and silver, or carved in ivory and crystal, some-

times enamelled or damascened, and often glittering with gems,

added to the ceremonial splendour of the great abbeys and

cathedrals. Images were common throughout the Middle Ages,

and they became more numerous towards the end. Every

church was supposed to have a crucifix or rood, a figure of

St. Mary the Virgin, and of its name or patron saint. The

patron stood sometimes over the porch ; and passages, with

stairs leading to them, found in some porches, are supposed

to have been used for access to these images, that they might

be vested or decorated for their festivals. Other saints were

added in continually increasing numbers, for decoration or for

devotion. The existence of money boxes for offerings and of

stands or receptacles for lights has been inferred from brackets

and other traces which have been found near the supposed

position of some of the more renowned images and shrines.

In some churches may still be seen the hagioscope, or squint,

an opening, usually cut obliquely through the wall, in order

that the high altar, or a shrine, or some favourite image,

might be seen from outside, or watched from a room con-

nected with the church. In other places, the low side-window

remains. This was an aperture, usually under a window, which

was closed with a shutter and generally grated, but never glazed.

Many uses have been suggested for these low side-windows, but

none of the arguments are satisfactory. Nobody knows what

they were used for. We do not find confessionals, as in modern

churches ; but we read of shryving stools, which probably were

movable; and priests were ordered to hear confessions in the

open church, not 'behind the veil,' nor out of sight. The

Easter Sepulchres, which were often made under an arch in the

north wall of the chancel, were all destroyed, with the roods and

other images, at the Reformation. The intention of the first

reformers was to abolish manifest occasions of idolatry, and not

to destroy works of art, as such ; but plunderers and puritanical

bigots, through greed or ignorance, made no distinction. The

principal change that need be recorded here is that the medieval

stone altars were replaced, almost universally, by the more primi-

tive wooden table. The Elizabethan and Jacobean tables are often

rich specimens of their time and style. They stood usually in

the chancel and were carried into the body of the church and

placed lengthways in it when the congregation used them.

Under Charles I they were railed in at the east end ; and so

they came by degrees to be fixed in the position of the stone

altars, by which in later times they have been once more

dispossessed. In place of the images and carvings in the

chancel, we find the commandments, the creed, and the Lord's

Prayer either graven or painted. The English Bible, the

commentary of Erasmus, the Homilies, and Foxe's Book of

Martyrs were among the appointed furniture of every church :

nor should we omit the hourglasses, in their brackets of

hammered iron, which were set up for the shaming of dull

preachers and the protection of their audience. The royal

arms, with the initials of every sovereign from Elizabeth

Plate XXI

PLAN OF

LINCOLN

CATHEDRAL

onwards, and with the coats of each dynasty, are among the

most interesting and satisfactory memorials in our national

churches.

9. Monastic Buildings.

The fittings and arrangements of monastic churches were

similar to those in cathedral and collegiate churches. The

public worship of the communities consisted of the seven

canonical hours or the Divine office, and of the high mass, all

of them chaunted or sung in choir. In places which had

important relics or popular images, as at St. Alban's and

Walsingham, the shrine with its pilgrimages and particular

devotions was the chief object in the life and worship of the

church. In some places, a religious community and a parish

seem to have shared a church : in such cases, the choir would

belong to the community, and the nave to the parishioners.

We have no complete remains of any monastery ; but a general

notion of the arrangements can be obtained from disconnected

accounts, and from various ruins. There was no fixed arrange-

ments, the plans in every case depending on the site, and

especially on the disposition of the water supply ; but the

similarity of life and rule, and the similar needs of the monastic

bodies, produced a certain uniformity of plan, subject to special

and local variations. A plan is given here of Kirkstall Abbey,

near Leeds [Pl. xxii, xxii a], a Cistercian house. A monastery

stood in its close or precincts, surrounded by a wall, in which

was the chief gateway and various postern doors. The great

gateway was often west of the church. The buildings were

grouped round the cloister court. On the north of this usually

was the refectory, with the kitchen, cellars, and locutorium, or

parlour, or monks' day-room, somewhere near it. South-east of

the church, and often communicating with it by a passage or

slypp, was the chapter-house, in which the discipline and public

business of the community were transacted. Near this were

usually the vestries, the treasury, and the mortuary chamber,

leading to the cemetery. South-west of the church, on the

24

ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE

west of the cloister, and opposite the chapter-house, was the

lay brothers' day-room. On the first floor, above the two day-

rooms, were the dormitories of the monks and the lay brethren

respectively, that of the former communicating through closed

passages with the church. In the cloister carols, or carrels, small

enclosed studies of wainscot, for the monks to read or write

in, were constructed between the archways. There was also

a library, and an infirmary; and all the larger monasteries

must have contained barns, byres, breweries, bakehouses,

laundries, as well as workshops and stores of every kind.

There was very often a mill, if the monastery were built on

a stream; and the drainage was carefully provided for. The

abbot and prior had lodges or lodgings of their own. There

was always a guest house or Hospitium, which was sometimes

over, and generally near, the great gateway. This was kept,

as a college gate is now, by porters, and there was access

through it for horses and carriages. This arrangement pre-

vailed, more or less, in all the houses of the Benedictine order,

and in most of its branches or offshoots, as well as in the

friaries. In orders like the Carthusian, in which the monks

lived, slept, ate, and worked, each in his own cell or set of

rooms, with his own garden, and the only community duties were

those of the choir and chapter-house, the plans and arrange-

ments were necessarily modified. The plan of a monastery was

followed by the founders of colleges. The old college build-

ings of Merton, the original buildings of New, of Magdalen,

and of Corpus Christi, all in Oxford, still show the arrange-

ments of a college in the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, and

sixteenth centuries. There were about 600 religious houses

in England at the Dissolution. Most of them were founded

before the time of Richard II. Only eight were founded in

the fifteenth century, as against 157 in the reign of Henry III.

Sixty foundations for charity and learning were endowed in

the fifteenth century. As monasteries declined, colleges, schools,

hospitals, and alms-houses became numerous. The hospital of

St. Cross at Winchester is in arrangement not unlike a college;

every inmate having his own set of rooms, and formerly using

the refectory, as well as the chapel, in common. The whole

PLATE XXII

KIRKSTALL ABBEY IN 1190: GROUND PLAN.

(By J. Wreghitt Connon, Esq., F.R.I.B.A.)

PLATE

XXII

A

MONASTIC BUILDINGS

25

community was ruled by a master, and guarded in theory by

a porter's lodge from the anxiety*and sorrows of the outer

world.

BOOKS FOR REFERENCE.

Parker, Glossary of Terms used in Architecture, 1845.

— Concise Glossary of Architecture, 1875.

— An Introduction to the Study of Gothic Architecture, 13th ed.,

Rickman & Parker, An attempt to Discriminate the Styles of Archi-

tecture in England, 6th ed., 1862.

Bloxam, Principles of Gothic Ecclesiastical Architecture and Companion

to Gothic Architecture, 3 vols., 11th ed., 1882.

Romilly Allen, Monumental History of the British Church, S.P.C.K.

(Chap. v, 'Anglo-Saxon Architecture'), 1889.

Sharpe, Architectural Parallels, 1848.

Freeman, History of Architecture, 1849.

— Origin and Developement of Window Tracery, 1851.

Petit, Remarks on Church Architecture, 2 vols., c. 1850.

Poole, Church Architecture, 1842.

Willis, Essays on Architectural History of Cathedrals, &c. in The

Archaeological Journal, passim.

— Architectural History of Canterbury Cathedral, 1845.

Cutts, A Manual for the Study of Sepulchral Slabs and Crosses, 1849.

Boutell, Christian Monuments, 1854.

Bloxam, A Glimpse at the Monumental Architecture of Great Britain,

(For other works see under Sections II, IV, XII.)

II

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

i. Simple and Defensive Character of Early Domestic

Architecture.

There are few people who are not willing to recognize the

fact that an Englishman’s house is his castle: and there are

equally few who recognize that in early times, conversely, an

Englishman’s castle was his house. Such was, however, the

case, and it is difficult to draw a hard and fast line between

military and domestic architecture. In early times, and indeed

through all the centuries down to the days of the Tudors, one

of the first requisites of a dwelling was adequate means of

defence against attack. The necessity for precaution varied

according to circumstances : according to the district, and to the

importance of the owner of the house. Near the Scottish

border, where forays were of frequent occurrence, all houses of

any importance were strongly fortified, and very curious struc-

tures they were. What are known as pele towers [Pl. xxiii]

consisted of little besides a single tower standing within a small

irregular enclosure. Very many houses in the North of England

retain the ancient pele buried among later additions: it being

the nucleus round which the more modern buildings have

gathered. The tower contained some five stages ; the base-

ment was occupied by the cattle in times of trouble ; the floor

above was a store, and here was the entrance door, reached

by a ladder. From this floor started the circular stone stair-

case which led to the upper floors, the first of which con-

tained the hall or common-room. In many cases each stage

contained only the one room, but in later examples small

separate sleeping chambers were contrived in the enormously

thick walls. The roof was generally flat, and served as a look-

PLATE

XXIII

YANWITH

PELL.

WEST

MORLAND

(FOURTEENTH

CENTURY).

BEFORE THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY

27

out. This primitive type of dwelling lingered on till quite late in some parts of the Lowlands of Scotland, and dwellings with no more elaborate accommodation than this were still built at a time when such vast and splendid mansions as Burghley House and Holdenby were being reared.

These quaint pele towers are mentioned because they show in a striking manner the kind of accommodation which satisfied the better class of people during the period when men's efforts were directed almost as much to the preservation as to the enjoyment of life. But the particular form of the towers is a local survival. They provide the necessary rooms one over the other, in order to minimize the extent of wall liable to close attack. Where danger was more remote the requisite rooms were placed alongside of one another. An interesting example of the vertical arrangement is still to be seen, far away from the Scottish border, at Castleton in Derbyshire, where the small twelfth-century keep of the castle still remains perched high up above the precipitous gorge into which the well-known Peak cavern opens. From this side it is inaccessible; on another the ground falls abruptly away to a valley, while across the steep tongue of land which intervenes between the gorge and the valley is drawn the enclosing wall of the castle. It was in this keep that the domestic part of the establishment was lodged, on three or four floors of one room each.

Three or four rooms were all that were required in the century succeeding the Conquest, and these rooms always bore the same relation to each other. This relation was maintained for five centuries, and the vast palace of Audley End, built in the reign of James I, was but an elaboration of the few apartments which satisfied the domestic wants of our Norman kings. The root-idea underlying both is the same. The most important of the rooms was the hall, and its importance can hardly be exaggerated. It was the common living-room of the house, and such it continued to be for century after century, until, with the progress of ideas, and the subdivision of space into more and more chambers for special uses, its old character changed. It became an entrance hall: a great vestibule instead of a great living-room. It ceased to be the centre of the

28

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

domestic system, and house-planning was regarded from a

different point of view. The supreme importance of the hall

is indicated by the fact that it became synonymous with the

house itself; the chief residence of a village was called the

Hall, a name which has survived down to the present day.

Attached to the hall were two other rooms, the kitchen and--

to use the expressive term of later years--the parlour. The

former was always known as the kitchen, but the latter was

first termed the solar or sollere, and was the private chamber of

the lord : in later times the principal room devoted to the

use of the family, as distinguished from the servants, was

called the parlour, and is so named on most house plans of

Queen Elizabeth's time. The idea that underlay the arrange-

ments of all houses was therefore extremely simple : the hall in

the middle; at one end the kitchen, or servants' quarters ; at

the other end the solar, or family quarters. In early times

there was a very scanty subdivision of rooms, and the servants'

end was more elaborated than the master's, although more for

his benefit than for theirs. So early as the reign of King

Henry III we hear of a larder, a sewery, and a cellar, forming

part of the kitchen department ; but these rooms were intro-

duced for the lord's convenience, not for his servants'; and it

may be taken for granted that quite down to recent times, if

inconvenience had to be suffered, it fell upon the servants

rather than upon the master. Still the greatest personages in

the land were content with arrangements which would be

intolerable in the present day. There must have been cases

of overcrowding which would have scandalized modern ideas.

Indeed, we know from the minstrel's lays which have survived

that it was customary for the whole household, except the lord

and lady, not only to eat in the hall, but to use it as a sleeping

apartment, and that the custom did not tend to the well-being of

the people. If room could not be found in the hall, guests were

quite content to sleep in the stables, or indeed anywhere under

cover ; and it was no particular mark of inferiority, nor in any way

an unusual proceeding, for Ivanhoe, when he visited his father's

house in disguise, to take his night's rest in the stable. Nor

need we sympathize overmuch with Don Quixote when he was

BEFORE THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY

29

relegated to the loft of the inn for his repose. Autres temps, autres mœurs. Although the lord had his solar, or private

room, it was certainly no more than he wanted, for it served for all purposes not public. It was at once bedroom and audience-

chamber. Edward I and his queen were sitting on their bed, attended by the ladies of the court, when they were nearly

killed by lightning in the year 1287. Nevertheless, limited as the accommodation was, it was considered enough for the

purpose during the three centuries that followed the Conquest.

Yanwith Pele [Pl. xxiii] is actually the tower of a fourteenth-century house containing accommodation arranged round a court-

yard ; but it gives a fair idea of what a pele tower is like. It consists of three storeys, the ordinary number being five. The

square-headed windows are insertions of the sixteenth century. Yanwith is a good example of the way in which an early house

was planned: exhibiting the customary relation of the hall, kitchen, and solar, which in this instance was placed in the

tower.

Although the rooms already mentioned constituted the main part of the house, namely, the hall, the solar, and the kitchen,

they were not always on the same level. The solar appears always to have been an upper chamber, and was approached,

unless the hall also was on an upper floor, by steps of wood or stone which led sometimes direct from the hall, and sometimes

from the court outside. The space beneath the solar, and also beneath the hall when the two were on the same level, was used

as cellars or stores, and was usually approached from outside. These arrangements were extremely simple, extremely rough,

and one would suppose extremely uncomfortable; and it is in the expansion of these rooms, in adding more and more for the

family, and more and more for the servants and the service of the family, that the growth of English domestic architecture

consists ; but down to the end of the reign of James I the hall divided the family apartments from those of the servants,

and was the common ground upon which the household met, particularly at meal times.

The solar usually had a fireplace with a flue; but the hall was generally warmed by a fire on a central hearth, the smoke

30

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

finding its way out through a lantern on the roof. This custom was not finally superseded until Elizabeth's reign, since a palace which was built at Richmond for Henry VII about the year 1500 had the same arrangement. In the return of the Commissioners of Parliament made in 1649, they expressly mention, when describing the great hall, that it had 'in the midst a brick hearth for a charcoal fire, having a large lanthorn in the roof of the hall fitted for that purpose, turreted and covered with lead.' At Penshurst, in Kent, the lantern still remains in the roof of the great hall. When there was no opportunity for the smoke to escape through the roof, as was the case with the keep of a castle, where the hall had two or three floors over it, a fireplace was provided ; and the chimneys which enclosed the flues of such fireplaces, or those of the solars, are to be seen on a number of early houses. Among them may be instanced a house at Christchurch, Hampshire ; the Jews' house at Lincoln, where the base remains; and the manor-house at Boothby Pagnell, in Lincolnshire, all of the twelfth century.

Although the component parts of houses were much the same in all cases, yet these parts were differently arranged to meet local or personal needs, so that no two houses are exactly alike. Not very many early examples have survived, and of those that do remain a great number have been incorporated with modern buildings, or have been altered from their original arrangements. It is only through the light thrown by contemporary records, and by such remains as are to be found up and down the country, that the original apartments can be pieced together; and there is no building to which the curious inquirer can go, and there see clearly before his eyes the actual rooms and doors and windows in the relation to each other which they had when built five or six centuries ago. Perhaps the most perfect example left of a great hall of the twelfth century is that at Oakham Castle [Pl. xxiv]. It is 65 feet long by 43 feet wide, and might easily be mistaken by a casual visitor for a church, for the roof is carried on two rows of pillars and arches, which thus divide the building into what look like a nave and two aisles. Nor is this the only resemblance : for the pillars have bases upon which they stand, and capitals which support the

PLATE XXIV

I. OAKHAM C.

ABOUT 1180.

2. OAKHAM CASTLE HALL : INTERIOR.

BEFORE THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY

31

arches, just in the manner of churches. The windows in the

side walls are small, according to the custom of the time,

and there is a little east window; but it is too high up for

a church, and there is nothing to suggest a chancel. There is

no fireplace, therefore the inference is that there was a fire on

the floor, and a lantern on the roof. The resemblance of this

domestic hall to a church is a fact of great significance, for it

tends to show, and in a striking way, that there was no essential

difference between ecclesiastical and domestic architecture--

a fact which is not so generally grasped as it ought to be.

Architecture was at that time a science of construction, and

problems of similar nature were solved in similar ways, whether

they occurred in a church or in a house. Architectural treat-

ment was not then a means of displaying the learning, or the

ignorance, of the designer: it was the ordinary method of

expression adopted as a matter of course. In the hall at

Oakham a large space had to be covered, and recourse was

had to the usual expedient of dividing the width into three

parts by means of pillars carrying a wall, so that the roof might

be formed of three short spans instead of one long one. The

wall was carried on the pillars by means of arches, not because

they looked well or lent mystery to the view by impeding it,

but because that was the best method of construction known to

the builders. Had they been able to cover the space with one

large roof without using intermediate support, no doubt they

would have done so. The difference in architectural treatment

between ecclesiastical and domestic buildings will be found not

so much in the detail as in the general disposition consequent

upon the different purposes to be fulfilled. A door, an arch,

or a window might be taken from either and placed in the other

without the slightest incongruity in appearance, unless it might

arise from the window having a transom, or horizontal cross-

bar, which very seldom occurs in church windows before the

Perpendicular period. But a house with two storeys, and a fire-

place in the upper one, would be a composite structure that

could never be mistaken for a church. At the same time, while

the detail of particular features would be alike in both buildings,

it is also true that more richness and elaboration were bestowed

32

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

upon the church than upon the house. As houses developed in

complexity the distinction naturally increased, and by the time

of the great house-building era of Elizabeth's days, a domestic

style had established itself which was widely different from that

associated with churches: but even then masons were not so

much alive to the difference which ought to exist between

church-work and house-work as the modern amateur could

wish, and churches which were 'restored' in the early part of

the seventeenth century often have a curiously domestic

look.

From the thirteenth century onwards there were many fine

houses built of wood and plaster in certain districts, particularly

in the Western counties, from Cheshire to Herefordshire, and

some of the most picturesque remains which we possess are

to be seen in that part of England. But naturally it is not

among these that we must seek for examples of the fortified

mansion, but rather in localities where stone was to be found.

Of the latter class Aydon Castle, in Northumberland, is a good

specimen [Pl. xxv], as is Little Wenham, in Suffolk, which is

remarkable for affording an early instance of the use of brick.

Of the two plans of Aydon Castle [Pl. xxv, 2] the upper floor

indicates the extent of the house; the additional walls that

appear on the ground-plan are those which enclosed the court-

yards. In this example the kitchens and servants' offices are

on the ground-floor; the hall and family rooms are on the

upper floor. The hall, which is the large central apartment,

was approached by an outside staircase that led in the usual

manner into the screens (see below) at the end of the hall.

At Stokesay Castle, in Shropshire, the main fortifications are

of stone, while the existing gatehouse, built in Elizabethan

times, when defence was no longer of importance, is of timber-

work.

2. Fourteenth Century.

During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries no great advance

seems to have been made in the arrangement of dwellings, but

in the fourteenth much was done to improve them. In con-

PLATE XXV

I. AYTON CASTLE.

Upper floor

II. AYTON CASTLE : PLANS.

LATE THIRTEENTH CENTURY.

FOURTEENTH CENTURY

33

sequence of the growing desire for privacy, the number of rooms was increased, and they were made more comfortable by the multiplication of fireplaces, and more cheerful by the enlargement of the windows. The hall gradually assumed that particular disposition which characterized it down to the end of the sixteenth century. It has already been pointed out how the hall stood between the kitchen and the solar. The entrance was in one of the side walls, near the kitchen end; this entrance was now partitioned off from the body of the hall by a screen, usually made of wood, and carried across the width of the hall, thus cutting off a passage, called the screens. There were two doors through the screen into the body of the hall; and in the end wall of the hall adjacent to the screen there were usually three doors, that led, one into the buttery, a second down a short passage to the kitchen, and a third into a pantry or other office. These doors may still be seen in many ancient houses, although often built up. Sometimes there were only two, one for the buttery and one for the kitchen. The screen itself was nine or ten feet high, and supported a gallery over the passage for the use of the minstrels, who reached it either by a small staircase, or from a room on the upper floor. In addition to the screen, further protection was afforded to the hall by a porch outside the front door. At the end of the hall, opposite to the screen, was the daïs, a platform raised some five or six inches above the general level of the floor, and thus affording a suitable position for the high table, at which the lord and his guests took their meals. Through the end wall at the back of the daïs was pierced the opening that led to the solar, and to the other family rooms. Fireplaces were still rare in halls, and it is on record that the lord and his guests sometimes withdrew to a room furnished with one in order to dine. It will be seen, therefore, that the old primitive arrangements are being refined. The fierce blasts of wind that used to enter at every opening of the door are now partly checked by the screen; the presence of which also enables retainers to take their ale at the buttery, and to reach the kitchen without actually passing through the hall. But the latter is still a somewhat dismal apartment: scantily lighted,

BARNARD

D

34

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

and that by windows high up in the wall, and chilly from want

of a fireplace, or, if not chilly, smoky from want of a flue. In

subsequent years these defects were remedied : a fireplace was

introduced into one of the side walls, and a bay window was

placed at the end of the daïs, with the sill brought down

sufficiently low to enable the occupants to look out. But

hitherto there had been no great desire for a prospect, inasmuch

as the hall was enclosed within a wall of defence. At Sutton

Courtenay, in Berkshire, there is at the upper end of the hall

a small low side-window beneath the ordinary window. This

may be the first indication of a desire to obtain an outlook from

the daïs.

Those who are familiar with the halls of colleges will no doubt

have felt the description of the hall of a fourteenth-century house

to be no new thing. Indeed, there is no better way of realizing

the appearance and arrangement of an ancient hall than by

inspecting those of the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge.

There can be seen the hall, the screens, and in some cases

the buttery too, occupying the same relation to each other,

and answering the same purposes, as they did in large houses

of five centuries ago.

In addition to the rooms required for actual domestic use,

some of the larger houses had a chapel incorporated with them ;

but this was a comparatively infrequent feature, not being an

essential item, as was the hall, the solar, and the kitchen.

Naturally, the number of rooms varied with the size of the

household and the wealth of the owner ; and these early homes

range from the inconsiderable houses of Woodcroft and North-

borough in Northamptonshire to the castles of Raby in Durham

and Broughton in Oxfordshire : but all were as yet small

compared with the vast edifices of Elizabeth's time. All, how-

ever, were more or less fortified, according to the district and

the importance of the owner. In the extreme north of England

houses followed the old fortalice type to a much later date than

elsewhere. In more peaceful regions the smaller personages

could trust themselves to less defensible houses than could their

great neighbours. Thus throughout the country we get a certain

mixture of types, and it is impossible to say that by a certain

FOURTEENTH CENTURY

35

year such features were universally dropped, or such others universally adopted : but always and everywhere the houses had the same root-idea of hall, solar, and kitchen. The external treatment, too, varied according to the locality. The earlier houses which have survived are of stone, but it should be remembered that wood played a large part in the construction of all buildings : that many of the rooms of important houses, and even of castles, were built of wood. These have all perished, and in what remains in stone we see only a portion of the original structure.

One of the commonest means of adding to the security of a house in flat districts was to surround it with a moat, and most houses of any consequence were so surrounded. In many cases the moats have almost if not entirely disappeared, their presence being indicated only by a depression in the ground ; but in a few instances they still remain, and continue to wash the walls of the dwellings they protected. In hilly districts they were not necessary, as a precipitous situation served the builder's turn in this respect. Another means of defence adopted was to build the house round a courtyard, for by the end of the fourteenth century the number of rooms had increased to such an extent as to enable this to be done. The old range of buildings with which we are now familiar--the hall, the solar (or, as it may now be called, 'the parlour'), and the kitchen--was supplemented by other rooms, arranged in two wings returning at right angles to it, and thus forming three sides of a court. The fourth was closed by a wall, or occupied by a further range of buildings, having in the middle the gatehouse. Round the whole went the moat. The outer walls were still so constructed as to diminish, as far as possible, facilities for hostile entry. The windows were few, and no larger than was absolutely requisite. Projecting towers or turrets were placed at the corners, and sometimes also halfway along each side, furnished with loopholes for the bowmen or embrasures for cannon. Where the hall came, the windows of which were probably larger, the moat was wider, to give additional security. The only means of ingress was through the gateway, access to which was gained by a drawbridge over the moat. This entrance and

D 2

36

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

its approaches were commanded by flanking towers, and its

narrow passage was closed at each end by ponderous gates, and

often by a portcullis in addition. Though not castles in the

sense of being military strongholds, many of the precautions of

a castle were adopted in these fortified manor-houses, and life

within them must have been dull, and hedged about with endless

restrictions. No wonder that when the time came to cast

restraint aside, the whole country blossomed out into buildings

that vied with each other in the cheerfulness of their aspect

and the freedom of their surroundings.

In hilly country the conditions of the site did not always

permit of so regular a disposition as was possible on level land.

At Haddon Hall [Plates xxvi ; xxvii], for instance, the entrance

tower is at one corner of the building, instead of being midway

in the front ; and there is no attempt to observe straightness of

line or regularity of disposition. Haddon is perhaps the best

example left to us of an ancient house: as it was when. the

family gave it up as a place of residence a hundred and fifty

years ago, so it remains to-day. The very depressions in the

kitchen-table made by the mincing-knife are there still. Nor

has the building been altered to keep pace with the times since

the days when the tide of fashion set strongly in the direction of

modern ideas. There is not a sash-window in the whole place.

Yet up to the end of the sixteenth century it had been altered to

suit the changing requirements of its inmates ; generation after

generation had pulled down or added to the work of its fathers,

so as to make itself more comfortable, until the most extensive

operations of all were undertaken by Dorothy Vernon and her

husband in the closing years of the sixteenth century; and

hardly anything has been done since.

Haddon consists of two courts, and possessed them before

the end of the fourteenth century. The outer walls are sparsely

furnished with windows, and the hall, which required more light

than other rooms, was placed in the block that separates the

two courts, thus enabling it to derive its light from one or both

of them. The kitchen, which comes up to an outside wall,

suffers accordingly : its windows are so small that even at mid-

day it is only dimly lighted ; the neighbouring uffices are even

PLATE

XXVI

HADDON

HALL.

darker. The family side of the house is far more cheerful.

It looks towards the south, and was greatly improved in

Elizabeth's reign, when large windows were the fashion. But

the arrangements which satisfied the wants of the Vernons and

the Manners down to the seventeenth century were found to be

incompatible with the comfort that became indispensable in the

eighteenth ; the place ceased to be a tolerable dwelling, which

indeed Horace Walpole averred it never could have been, and

so the family left it. Haddon is worth a visit from all who

are interested in domestic architecture, not only on account of

its romantic situation and picturesque appearance, but because

it conveys so vivid an idea of the arrangement of a medieval

dwelling. Other houses of the fourteenth century which show

the gradual growth of the buildings are Raby Castle, in the

county of Durham ; Yanwith Hall, Westmoreland [Pl. xxiii] ;

Markenfield Hall, Yorkshire; Broughton Castle, Oxfordshire ;

Sutton Courtenay, Berkshire; Penshurst and Ightham Mote,

Kent ; and Meare in Somerset.

It must be borne in mind that the architectural treatment

of houses changed with the changes that are to be found in

ecclesiastical buildings. The small doors and windows of the

Norman period strove to enlarge themselves in company with

their near relatives in the churches, but always they were con-

fronted with the necessity for defence. Occasionally they defied

this constraint, especially when they were not immediately on an

external wall, or were in homes situated in comparatively peace-

ful districts. The windows began to be glazed in the better

houses, though by no means universally. In many cases the

portion above the transom was glazed, while the lower half was

protected only by wooden shutters. The roofs, which in quite

early time were often made of shingles, were found too inflam-

mable, and were gradually covered with tiles, stone slates, or

lead. Internally the woodwork was exposed to view in the

manner of church roofs. The great halls, often of wide span,

had roofs of much elaboration, that required considerable

skill and ingenuity in the framing together. The roof over

Westminster Hall is one of the finest specimens left of this

class, but it dates from a period somewhat later than the time

PLATE XXXVII

1. HADDON HALL : GROUND PLAN.

(TWELFTH TO SIXTEENTH CENTURIES.)

2. OXBURGH HALL : GROUND PLAN.

(1482.)

PLATE

XXVII

OXBURGH

HALL

GROUND

PLAN.

(1484.)

HADDON

HALL

GROUND

PLAN.

LONG

GALLERY

EAST

MOOR

UPPER

COURT

LOWER

COURT

HALL

KITCHEN

GREAT

CHAMBER

LODGE

CHAPEL

FIFTEENTH CENTURY

39

between the kitchen and the parlour. Attention began to be paid to the grouping and arrangersent, not only from motives of convenience and security, but also from regard to external appearance. The struggle between the old over-mastering desire for safety and the new desire for elegance and cheerfulness was carried on all through this century and well into the next, but throughout this period the old desire continued to affect the results. Elegance and cheerfulness, however, asserted themselves, and produced such creations as the great hall at Kenilworth Castle, and the Buck Hall at Cowdray, in Sussex : large and lofty apartments with abundance of light admitted through windows of beautiful design. These castles and mansions were still difficult of access for those who had not the privilege of entrance, for there was yet the moat to cross and the gatehouse to traverse ; and it was in the gatehouses that some of the last relics of the old defensive appliances lingered. They were a curious mixture of the old and of the new. In them appeared sinister openings of the old cross-œuillet form from which the arrow could fly, or of circular shape from which the cannon-ball could speed on a heavier but hardly longer flight. With these were mingled devices and ornamentation ; and while the stranger waited for the drawbridge to fall and the portcullis to creak slowly upwards, his eye could wander over the armorial insignia which taught him the family history of the personage he came to see. The very plan of some of the houses shows how considerations of appearance mingled with those of defence. There are examples in which a strict symmetry of outline and of grouping is observed, projecting turrets being introduced at intervals that depended as much upon the designer's sense of proportion as upon the dictates of military science. Of this mode of building Hurstmonceux, in Sussex, is a splendid illustration. Another, smaller, but interesting instance is to be seen in the ruins of Kirby Muxloe, in Leicestershire. The moat remains, enclosing a rectangular space which is bounded by the remnants of the walls of the house. The ground and first floors of the gatehouse remain, and one corner tower is standing to its full height. The date is probably about 1460, and the builder must have been the William, Lord Hastings, who was executed by

40

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

Richard III. It is quite clear that there was a tower at each

angle of the building, and•a projection in the centre of each

front, thus giving a symmetrical plan. The central projection

on one front formed the gateway, but how the others were

utilized there is nothing to show. Both the gateway and the

corner tower are strictly symmetrical in themselves, except for

the position of a door or a window; projections which corre-

spond with each other being carefully made equal. This is

quite different from the haphazard arrangement of Haddon,

for instance, and is a significant fact, for the time was rapidly

approaching when English architecture was to feel the touch

of Italian influences, which brought, among other things, a

regard for symmetry amounting sometimes to affectation. At

Kirby Muxloe there is still a real desire for defence. The

drawbridge and the portcullis indicate this, as also do the

embrasures, set low for the better serving of the cannon. Such

windows as remain are sparingly introduced into outer walls,

especially on the ground-floor; they are less restricted on the

upper one. Yet level with the top of the drawbridge when it

was raised, and looking straight upon the direct approach, are

two-light windows of fair height and width. The mixture is

curious, for the defensive arrangements are genuine. The

possibility of having to repel an attack was evidently contem-

plated, while at the same time the size of the windows was such

as to afford the assailant an opportunity for a telling counter-

stroke. In connexion with the gateway are the usual chambers

for those in charge, and each room here, as well as in the

corner tower (which also is provided with embrasures on the

ground-floor), is supplied with a latrine in an attached building.

The arrangement of these conveniences in connexion with

medieval buildings is a matter of considerable interest. Much

attention was bestowed upon their planning, and they were

supplied with great liberality. They were usually placed in

a projecting turret, and in all respects they complied with

sanitary requirements far better than their successors in

Elizabethan times, which were sometimes cut off from any

outside wall. Of the•remaining•buildings at Kirby Muxloe

there is nothing left beyond the outline of the enclosing wall.

PLATE

XXVIII

OXBURGH

HALL

:

GATEHOUSE

FIFTEENTH CENTURY

41

It is certain that the projecting towers were connected by

a range of buildings of lower elevatioⁿ, which must have resulted

in a picturesque composition of straight roofs and lofty towers at

regular intervals; but where the hall was placed, or what rooms

went to make up the buildings that enclosed the courtyard, is

merely matter for conjecture. What we do know, however,

is that combined with the old means of defence there was

a large courtyard planned with a strict regard to symmetry.

Another point worth attention is that this house was built of

brick, as also was Hurstmonceux: and brick, which seems

hardly to have been used until this century, was to become

a very usual material to employ.

Another brick house of about the same date as Kirby Muxloe

is Oxburgh Hall, in Norfolk [Plates xxvii; xxviii], of which

considerably more is left; at the same time, having been used

continuously as a habitation, it has undergone many alterations,

and has lost much of the genuine antiquity possessed by the

untouched fragments of Kirby Muxloe. Oxburgh also is built

round a courtyard within a moat, and is entered through a fine

and lofty gatehouse, which retains some defensive contrivances.

This gatehouse is at the bottom of the plan. Immediately

opposite to it is the hall with its porch, screens, and bay-

windows. To the left of the hall are the family rooms, and

to the right are the servants' rooms, the kitchen being in

the right-hand top corner. The small rooms which complete

the quadrangle were used for various inferior purposes. The

entrance-porch of the hall is not exactly opposite to the gate-

house. Symmetry of design was to be more generally adopted

in the next century; and although it seems to have been ob-

served at Kirby Muxloe, it was not yet universally accepted as

a maxim of house-planning. The exterior treatment at Oxburgh

is also freer than in earlier buildings; windows occur plenti-

fully in the outside walls, though they are yet small, seldom

exceeding three lights in width; they still have pointed heads,

but the curves are much flatter than in former times.

42

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

4. Tudor Period.

We have now come to the Tudor period. Ecclesiastical

architecture was passing through its gorgeous sunset at King's

College Chapel, Cambridge, St. George's Chapel, Windsor,

and Henry VII's Chapel at Westminster. Its forms were

still applied to domestic architecture, but the differences of

treatment were growing more marked, and the use of brick

for houses emphasized them. Windows in churches had in-

creased to a size far beyond the needs or the possibilities of

domestic architecture. The small Tudor flat-pointed window

had no place in a church. Chimneys, which were essentially

a domestic feature, were no longer subjected to a treatment

analogous to that applied to a pinnacle; they became indepen-

dent structures, upon which extraordinary pains were bestowed.

Every flue was separate, and was formed of cut and moulded

brickwork of surprising and intricate pattern. No country

can produce such magnificent specimens of design in brick

as our English chimneys of the end of the fifteenth century

and the opening years of the sixteenth, and they are almost

invariably decorated in a fashion derived from Gothic sources,

and not from the new source of inspiration, Italy.

The sixteenth century witnessed in English architecture the

first stages of that change from Gothic inspiration to Classic,

which affected the whole of Europe. It began with the tomb

erected by Henry VIII over his father's body in the splendid

chapel reared at Westminster by the deceased monarch. This

tomb was designed by an Italian, Piero Torrigiano, and it set

the fashion, to a certain extent, for many subsequent tombs; but

its influence hardly went further. From independent sources

came bits of detail in the same spirit, appearing here and there

amid work which was thoroughly English in character. But

the new fashion was confined to minutiae, and even. in such

large churches, it went only skin-deep, and left the framework

of the body still Gothic. When one-third of the century had

passed, there came the dissolution of the monasteries, and the

PLATE XXIX

1. COMPTON WINYATES.

2. COMPTON WINYATES : GROUND PLAN.

(ABOUT 1520.

TUDOR PERIOD

43

end of ecclesiastical architecture for the time being ; and what development there was in architecture must henceforward be sought for in houses. Of these there was no lack : Henry VIII's reign saw many new ones, but Elizabeth's vastly more. There probably never was, until our own day, so much building done in fifty years as during the reign of Elizabeth : and it is in the sixteenth century that domestic architecture really developed, and produced so many examples as to enable us to study them with tolerable completeness.

All through the first half of the century, the old desire for defence survived, and houses were surrounded by moats. The ancient simple arrangements of plan were still adhered to. The hall was the centre of domestic life. At right angles from it ran the blocks containing on the one hand the kitchen and its dependencies, on the other hand the parlour and its supplementary rooms, thus forming three sides of a court, the square of which was completed by the gatehouse, flanked right and left with a room or two, which were occupied by the porter, and by the falconers and other outdoor servants [Pl. xxix, Compton Winyates]. The court-plan survived throughout the century, but the increasing desire for symmetry, which was one of the outcomes of the Italian influence, soon began to fashion the court into a completely regular figure. On the main axial line, which passed through the centre, were placed the entrance gateway and the porch of the hall, which led into the screens and on through another doorway into a second court or a garden, after the moat had gone out of use. If there were a second court, this axial line would also pass through an archway in its further side. On either side of this axial line, the courts were treated with almost exact symmetry, bay answering to bay, window to window, and door to door. The plan of Audley End [Pl. xxx] illustrates this symmetrical arrangement. The consequence was that the disposition of the windows did not always answer to the arrangement of the rooms, and a fine bay-window, constructed in order to balance that at the daïs end of the hall, would sometimes light nothing more important than a larder or a buttery. The rooms round these courts were usually of single thickness, that is, one

44

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

side looked into the court, the other into the open country; and

there was no connecting corridor. The communication with the

hall was either across the courtyard or through the adjacent

chambers, and as the latter were by no means wide, in later times

the owners were confronted with an insoluble problem; for the

rooms, being thoroughfares, were uninhabitable consistently with

comfort. They were too narrow to allow of a passage being

taken out of their width, and to build a corridor round the

courtyard would have been counted an act of vandalism. There

is in Northamptonshire a house where the occupants of certain

bedrooms still have the choice of three unusual routes to the

breakfast-room; the first leads through the drawing-room, the

second through the kitchen, and the third across the open court-

yard. In some cases, as at Burghley House, the architectural

treatment of the courtyard has allowed of a corridor being

constructed round it without serious detriment to the effect,

but in many cases this has not been possible, and in conse-

quence the houses have been found intolerable and have been

abandoned.

But considerations of this kind did not enter into the social

ideals of the sixteenth century. The rooms surrounding the quad-

rangles, divided into groups of three or four, made admirable

lodgings for a guest and his retinue, and each group had its

door into the adjacent court. Although these groups were self-

contained, there were a certain number of rooms that were

common to the whole of the family and guests, of which the

chief were the hall (now always on the ground-floor), the great

chamber, and the long gallery. The last two were always

upstairs, the former being the successor of the solar in its

character of audience-chamber, and the latter being a product of

the times, of which the origin is obscure. Certain it is that

there was no such room in the fortified houses of the fifteenth

century, built though they may have been round a courtyard.

Possibly there was something of the kind in the original

Hampton Court Palace, which dates from 1515 to 1540. But

the long gallery first became general in Elizabeth's reign, and

it developed to an extent quite astonishing. In some of the

large houses it was as much as 180 or 200 feet long, and not

PLATE XXX

1. AUDLEY END.

2. AUDLEY END: GROUND PLAN.

TUDOR PERIOD

45

infrequently the house was expressly contrived so as to obtain

a gallery of great length. An unwieldy apartment of this kind

could only be upstairs. It was usually placed on the first floor,

but often on the second. One of the uses for which these long

galleries were built was the performance of music. An inscription

on the chimney-piece of the gallery at Apethorpe in Northamp-

tonshire makes this clear. In order to reach these important

upper rooms, good staircases were required. In old days,

'newel' staircases were all that was necessary. These are to

be found in the earliest medieval houses, and were for centuries

the only method of ascending from one floor to another. They

may still be climbed in many an old church tower, and obviously

were merely utilitarian, and destitute of any ornamental in-

tention. In England they seldom exceeded four feet in width,

although in France they were developed, in the time of Francis I,

into grand features, and are, indeed, distinctive of French archi-

tecture of that period. The smaller variety continued in use in

England until well into the sixteenth century, the latest example

being probably that in the market-house at Rothwell, built about

1578. But quite suddenly, apparently, and without any note-

worthy intermediate step, they were superseded by the broad

straight flights of stairs which characterize Elizabethan houses,

where, in place of the continuous circular ascent, broken only at

intervals by an insignificant halting-place, we find straight flights

of not more than six or seven steps, and then a spacious landing.

More often than not, these fine staircases are in wood rather

than in stone, and on the decoration of the woodwork all the

fancy of the Elizabethan workman was expended. There was

always at least one great staircase, and often there were three

or four, all required by the exigencies of the planning, which

arose quite as much from the desire to possess a splendid and

symmetrical house, as from the need for obtaining the requisite

accommodation ; for the wants of the inmates could often have

been met with much less expenditure had not considerations of

display intervened. The designer was prodigal in his arrange-

ments, and staircases had to be introduced at intervals, either

for appearance sake, to balance each other in their various

towers, or of necessity, since the hall still frequently extended

46

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

in height from ground to roof, thus cutting the upper floor into

two distinct halves.

Some of the larger houses had two and even three courts.

One of the largest of them was Hampton Court, the oldest

part of which was built by Cardinal Wolsey and presented by

him to Henry VIII, who continued to increase and embellish

it. This great palace affords an excellent example of a large

house of the Tudor period, which already foreshadows the

symmetrical treatment of its successors. It has several large

courts built on an axial line which passes through the archways

between them. The various gatehouses are embellished with

turrets and bay-windows, but the rest of the work, including the

sides of the courts, is of a very plain description. In its main

features it is Gothic in type, but here and there, such as in the

heads of arches, and notably in the roof of the great hall, there

is a strong infusion of Italian detail, which marks the new

foreign influence that had touched our English architecture.

This influence increased as the years went by. Instead of

merely appearing in the spandril of a pointed door-head, it

gradually altered the shape of the doorway itself: gave to it

a round arch, flanked it with classic pilasters, and crowned

it with a classic cornice. It changed the profiles of the

horizontal strings which made the circuit of the building:

and gave to what was a Gothic creation a classic form. It

turned the old highly wrought chimney-shafts into the semblance

of Greek and Roman columns, carrying a short length of

entablature by way of chimney-cap. Yet in spite of all this

foreign detail, the body of the house was English: notwith-

standing the trammels of symmetry, its plan remained un-

changed.

Its windows were a development of the English type, but

with heads square instead of pointed, and with mullions and

transoms much increased in number. The old windows of

two or three lights gave place to windows of four, five, and six;

instead of being two tiers high, they became three or even four.

The area of glass was more than doubled, and its increase

alarmed Bacon, who found it difficult to get away from sun

or cold. The windows were glazed, and no longer closed only

TUDOR PERIOD

47

with a shutter. A special development was the bay-window.

Already in the fifteenth century such windows had been introduced, but they were small in size and only one storey high ;

towards the end of the sixteenth, however, they had developed into features which often dominated the architecture, and many

a building owes its distinctive character to the bay-windows that embellish it. They are sometimes adjuncts of one or two

storeys, crowned with a rich parapet: but occasionally they reach the whole height of the house, and all the architectural

members which make the circuit of the walls also go round the bays, thus converting them from adjuncts into integral parts

of the structure.

The courtyards at Hampton Court may have been adopted from motives of security, for it was a moated house ; but those

of the large Elizabethan houses were survivals, and were retained partly from sentiment, partly for architectural effect.

One of these great houses must have been an extraordinary sight. Burghley House as we now see it is large, and has been

compared to a village : but it was not half so large as were Holdenby and Audley End [Pl. xxx] in their prime. Holdenby

was approached on the axial line by a 'large, long, straight, fair way,' as Lord Burghley called it, going the length of 'the green.'

This road led to the gatehouse, which gave access to a green court surrounded by a wall pierced with a great arch on either

side. Upon a terrace formed by a short flight of steps stood the front of the house, with its entrance in the centre. Through

this a second court was reached, on the opposite side of which, still on the main axis, was the porch of the hall. Traversing

the screens, another door gave access to yet another court, containing the kitchens, and out of this a central archway led

into the gardens. It was a palace rather than a house, and was no doubt built on so vast a scale in order to accommodate the

queen on her progresses.

The plan of Audley End [Pl. xxx] shows the enormous extent of one of the great houses of the early seventeenth century.

It is quite symmetrical in disposition, except for the excrescence on the left, which contained the kitchen. The hall occupies the

middle of the block between the two large courts, and one of

48

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

the wings at the upper end contained the chapel. There are

six staircases in the first court, four in the second, and two

adjacent to the wings at the upper end, twelve in all. The only

part left of this vast mansion is the lower front and the two

wings of the second court; but what is left forms a large house.

There was another type of mansion besides that built round

the old-fashioned court. This had a long straight body with

a wing at right angles to it at each end, and a projecting porch

in the middle, giving a kind of m shape, or, where the porch

did not project, an H shape. It has been supposed that the

E shape was adopted out of compliment to Elizabeth. This

may be so, but the conjecture is not borne out by a study of the

evolution of the house-planning of the period; although the

architect, or surveyor, John Thorpe, did design himself a house

in the shape of his initials I T, which was never built; and Sir

Thomas Tresham actually built two small houses embodying

the idea of the Trinity, and of the Passion of Christ, the former

being an equilateral triangle, and the latter a Greek cross.

Among the smaller houses the H plan was very common, and

they often had a courtyard enclosed by a wall, both in front

and at the back; the one entered through a gatehouse on the

centre-line, and the other having a central archway in the wall.

Of this type there are plenty of examples left in out-of-the-way

villages, where a quaint archway in a forecourt leads directly

up to the house door, which itself is in the centre of a

symmetrical structure.

We thus see that the old type of house, built round a court

and surrounded by a moat, was continued till quite late; in

time the moat was omitted, and the courtyard, which was

formerly planned in a somewhat haphazard way, was reduced

to strict order and symmetry; its insignificant lights were

multiplied indefinitely, and it was embellished with bay-windows

and with stair-turrets; its doorways were enlarged; its porch

was decorated with classic pilasters. But it was essentially the

same house, with its hall in the middle, and its kitchen and its

parlour on either side: the daïs was there, and the hall screen

with its gallery above: from the screens ran passages to the

kitchen, the buttery, and sometimes the larder; just as things had

Plate XXXI

ENTRANCE

COURT.

I. CHASTLETON.

GARDEN

COURT

ENTRANCE

COURT.

2. CHASTLETON : GROUND PLAN ABOUT 1603.

3. Hall. 2. Little Parlour. 3. Great Parlour 4. Nursety.

4. Room over Kitchen. 6. Pantry. 7. Passage.

been a hundred or two hundred years earlier. But the build-

ings flanking the hall were greatly increased and subdivided.

The kitchen was supplemented by a scullery, a 'pastry,' where

the ovens were, a surveying place, a spicery, a bolting-house,

and several other rooms of a like nature. A 'hall for hynds'

also appears on contemporary plans. The family apartments

now included the parlour, the winter parlour, the great chamber,

the gallery, the chapel, and a vast number of 'lodgings,' as they

were called, rooms which could serve as bedrooms or as sitting-

rooms for guests. Many of the largest of these houses have

either been pulled down or abandoned to decay. Others have

been greatly curtailed in size, or so altered to suit modern

requirements as to have lost much of their ancient character.

But as instances of the courtyard plan may be cited Burghley

House and Kirby Hall, both in Northamptonshire; Blickling

Hall in Norfolk, Knole in Kent, and Hoghton Tower in Lan-

cashire : as examples of the H plan, Hatfield House, Montacute

in Somerset, and Doddington in Lincolnshire. Smaller houses

are to be seen at Fountains Hall, Yorkshire, Cold Ashton in

Gloucestershire, and Chastleton in Oxfordshire [Pl. xxxi],

which is an instance of a house built round a very small court.

It is, however, of great interest, as it has undergone but little

alteration, and actually retains that rare feature the daïs.

These are but a few out of many that might be named : and

every county possesses in a greater or less degree examples

illustrating work of the Elizabethan period. They are not

always, perhaps not often, complete or untouched specimens ;

but characteristics that may be lacking in some will be found

present in others, and there is always something to show how

the Elizabethan architect did his work.

Inside, the same influences were at work which had changed

the exterior. There were much the same features as formerly,

but they were differently embellished, and the general result

was one of greatly increased enrichment. The development

of the staircase has been already mentioned : how from a plain

circular flight of steps, of which the only purpose was to give

access to the upper floors, it became crowded with fanciful

ornament. Much the same may be said of the fireplace.

BARNARD

E

50

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

Formerly but little design was spent upon this feature; in early times it had consisted of a hearth on the floor, with a projecting stone canopy above it to collect the smoke; or else of a recess in the wall covered by an arch. Some little decoration was bestowed upon these arches and canopies; but in Elizabethan work the arch was surrounded by a huge chimney-piece of either stone or wood, upon which as much ornament was lavished as upon the staircases. The central feature was usually the coat of arms of the owner, supplemented by badges and other family emblems; but occasionally an allegory was represented, or a scene from scripture, or personifications of the virtues. These were surrounded by intricate devices of flowers or strap-work, while, wherever space permitted, a panel would be introduced bearing the date, or the initials or motto of the master, or some pithy sentence in Latin, French, or English. The fireplace itself was merely a hearth-stone lying in the recess, on which was burnt the wood that served as fuel, for a sea-coal fire was uncommon. The wood was kept together at the sides by andirons or fire-dogs, and the impact of the flames was received upon an iron fire-back. Both andirons and fire-backs were ornamented in the prevailing fashion, and have survived in sufficient quantity to be tolerably familiar to most people. The walls of the better rooms were covered either with tapestry or with wood panelling. The former was often of extraordinary richness in the houses of the more wealthy. Cardinal Wolsey was a great collector of fine specimens, and the tapestries of Hampton Court excited the admiration of foreign visitors. From the splendid pieces in the great mansions 'with royal arras richly dight,' down to the 'smirched worm-eaten tapestry' of the ale-house, there were many gradations of excellence, and an infinite variety of subjects, in which gods and goddesses; saints, martyrs, and prophets; huntsmen, fishermen, Roman emperors, and a host of other personages played their parts; for the characters of mythology, as well as of sacred and secular history, seemed equally real to the men and women of Elizabeth's days. The hall at Wollaton Hall, Nottinghamshire [Pl. xxxii], is a fine example of the interior treatment of an Elizabethan room.

PLATE XXXII

WOLLATON HALL, NOTTS.

(1580-88.)

TUDOR PERIOD

51

There is the stone screen, the large fireplace, and the panelling

on the walls. The roof is of the open-timber type, but it has

the peculiarity that it supports the floor of a room above. The

windows, owing to the fact that the hall is surrounded by other

rooms on every side, are at an unusual height from the floor.

The ceilings of Elizabeth's time were decorated in a manner

peculiar to England. It was derived from the panelled ceilings

of the early Tudor period, which were formed of wooden ribs

arranged in rectangular patterns. These ribs were subsequently

constructed in plaster, and, owing to the pliant nature of that

material, soon became diverted from their original straight

forms into all kinds of geometrical and interlacing designs.

Like Alph, the sacred river, they meandered with a mazy

motion over the whole surface of the ceiling; often emphasized,

where they crossed, with delicately modelled foliage, and

enclosing in their course panels of different shapes wherein,

once more, the arms of the owner were emblazoned. The

diversity of pattern and of treatment is marvellous, and it

would be difficult to point to two designs exactly alike in

different houses. No doubt there were repetitions, for the

craftsmen seem to have worked from stock designs; but either

the duplicates have vanished in the destruction that has over-

taken many of these houses, or the detail was varied in the

various cases. The effect of an Elizabethan room was there-

fore exceedingly rich; the walls were handsomely covered,

and the great chimney-piece was a centre of decoration; the

ceiling was elaborately adorned, and the windows were filled

with glass of quaint and intricate pattern, or of glowing colours

amid which the 'pomp of heraldry' was again displayed.

Everything was done to set forth the estate and dignity of

the owner. The triumph of peace was complete; it was no

longer necessary to take thought of defence; it was no longer

needful to stay the fancy of the designer from a sense that, in

the ever-present risk of destruction by attack, expenditure upon

ornament was a waste of resources. The ingenuity formerly

lavished on contrivances for ensuring safety was now expended

on decoration. Houses were built for comfort, convenience,

and display, and they had at length entered upon that phase

E 2

52

DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE

of development which allies them far more closely to the

nineteenth century than to the thirteenth.

BOOKS FOR REFERENCE.

Turner & Parker, Domestic Architecture in England, 4 vols. (from

the Conquest to Henry VIII), 1877.

Dolman, An Analysis of Ancient Domestic Architecture in Great

Britain, 2 vols., 1864.

Pugin, Specimens of Gothic Architecture in England, 2 vols. (Gothic

and Tudor), 1821.

— Examples of Gothic Architecture in England, 3 vols. (Gothic and

Tudor), 1831.

Nash, Mansions of England, 4 vols., folio (Tudor and Elizabethan),

1839-49. Reprinted in 4to, 1869.

Habershon, Ancient Half-timbered Edifices of England, 1836.

Richardson, Architectural Remains of the Reigns of Elizabeth and

James I, 1840.

— Specimens of the Architecture of the Reigns of Elizabeth and

James I, 1837.

— Studies from Old English Mansions, 1841-8.

Shaw, Details of Elizabethan Architecture, 1834.

Gotch, Early Renaissance Architecture in England (1500–1625), 1901.

— Architecture of the Renaissance in England (1560–1635), 1891–4.

III

THE ART OF WAR, AND MILITARY

ARCHITECTURE

I. From the Anglo-Saxon Conquest to the

Battle of Hastings.

In the things that belong to war, no less than in the things

that belong to peace, there is a complete break in British

history at the Anglo-Saxon conquest. All our modern institu-

tions go back in a continuous line to the days of the half-

mythical Hengist and Cerdic, and then comes a great gap.

In military institutions most of all is this the case : the Roman

left many legacies of arms and armour, and even of fortifica-

tion, to the Frank and the Visigoth, but the Angle and the

Saxon inherited little or nothing from him. Dwelling far from

the Rhine, at the very back of Germany, they were much

less imbued with any tincture of Roman civilization than the

Teutonic races of the South and East. Goths, Gepidae,

Lombards, and Burgundians had learnt in the fifth century

to wear armour, to fight on horseback, and to use a considerable

variety of weapons. But the Old English, at their coming to

Britain, were still a nation of foot-soldiers, and were seldom

provided with any defensive armour save the shield. Even as

late as the eleventh century, representations of men in armour

are very rare in Anglo-Saxon manuscripts. However, we know

that helm and mail-shirt (byrnie) existed from the earliest time

of the settlement in Britain. Bede mentions them as being

worn by kings and other great ones : and the Beowulf repeatedly

speaks of the 'war net woven by the smith,' the 'hard and hand-

locked byrnie,' and the 'white (i.e. polished) helm.' The head-

54

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

piece was sometimes of metal, sometimes merely of leather,

stretched across an iron foundation, or having a framework

of iron or bronze placed over it [Pl. xliii, 12]: it was often

adorned with the figure of a wild boar by way of amulet, and

hence was called the boar-helm. But the majority of the Old

English went forth to war in their tunics and felt caps alone,

without any defensive armour save a shield of linden-wood,

strengthened at the centre by a projecting iron boss, and at

the edge by an iron rim [Pl. xliv, 1]. Of weapons of offence

the spear seems to have been by far the most common, and

'spear-wight' is a frequent synonym for the warrior [Pl. xliii,

1–5]. The sword was not so universally employed: when

found in early English graves it is a straight cut-and-thrust

weapon, about three feet in length, and generally destitute of

cross-piece or guard [Pl. xliii, 6, 7]. The axe was much

less common: when we come upon it, we find a light weapon

with a very curved head, suitable for casting no less than for

hewing [Pl. xliii, 11]. The dagger was better known than either

axe or sword, and was usually the second weapon of the Anglo-

Saxon spearman. It was a large two-edged stabbing-knife,

some fifteen inches long. This was the seax, which in popular

etymology was supposed to have given the Saxons their name.

Bows [Pl. xliii, 9], javelins, and slings were known, but not

much used: our ancestors were given to close fighting, not to

'long-bowls' and skirmishing tactics.

The most important part of the military strength of one of

the Heptarchic kingdoms consisted of the king's sworn com-

panions, the comites of Tacitus, the gesiths of the old law-books.

These were personal retainers of the early 'alderman' or

prince, who had vowed to be his 'men,' and to follow him in

peace and war. They had surrendered their freedom to him,

and sworn to obey him in all things: on the other hand, he

maintained them, gave them their arms and raiment, parted

the plunder with them, and endowed them with land after

a successful conquest of British soil. To aid the gesiths, the

whole levy of the country-side was called out when necessary;

for fyrd-fare, the going out to war, was one of the three primary

duties of the Anglo-Saxon subject. But this rude assembly,

PLATE XXXIII

1. NORWICH CASTLE.

2. BERKELEY CASTLE.

hastily equipped with improvised arms, was but the shaft of

the weapon of which the comitatus formed the iron head.

During the four centuries in which they were occupied in

expelling their Celtic neighbours, or fighting among themselves,

the English seem to have made little progress in their military

institutions. No desperate need came upon them, and they

kept up their ancient war customs long after their kinsmen

on the continent had begun to modify them. Their wars were

spasmodic and inconclusive: a victorious campaign did not

mean the permanent union of the conquered with the con-

quering state, but only that the king of one did homage to the

king of the other as long as he was compelled to do so. The

holding down of the vanquished would only have been possible

if the conqueror had kept a standing army, and had learnt

how to build fortresses among the newly subdued districts.

Neither of these ideas had come to the Old English: both

gesiths and fyrd went home after a victory, and fortification

was almost unknown. The nation dwelt in open towns and

villages, and had not even learnt how to patch up the ancient

walls of such places as had a Roman origin. Their utmost

idea of defence was to surround a mound with a ditch and

palisade [Pl. xxxv, 1]. Bamborough, the Northumbrian capital,

is the only place of which we are told that it was girt 'at first

with a hedge, and later with a wall of stones.'

The objectless strife of the Heptarchic kingdoms was still

in full swing, and Wessex, under Ecgberht, had just supplanted

Mercia as the temporarily dominant state, when a new and

all-important factor appeared in English politics. The Vikings

(men of the viks or creeks) from Denmark and Norway had first

shown themselves on the English coast at the end of the

eighth century: but about 830 they began to appear in vastly

increased numbers, and became a pressing danger to all the

Anglo-Saxon realms. They were war-bands of professional

pirates, led by chiefs elected for their skill and courage. At

first they came merely to sack peaceful seaports, and to plunder

the treasuries of wealthy monasteries, their desire being to

pillage rather than to fight. But their first successes soon

emboldened them to come out in much larger numbers, and

56

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

to try more dangerous feats than the hasty harrying of the

shore. From the first the Vikings showed a great superiority

as a fighting force to the English who came out against them.

The latter, though they had once been bold seamen themselves,

had for many years lost their original aptitude for the sea : in

the annals of the Heptarchy naval expeditions are very rare,

and none of the kingdoms that were in existence in 830–50

had any fleet to oppose to this new enemy. The Vikings came

and went unhindered, retiring to their ships [Pl. LXI, A]

when they found themselves hopelessly outnumbered, and

disappearing into the ocean. Against the force which generally

came out to meet them—the hasty levies of a single shire—they

were as a rule successful, for they were professional soldiers

contending with rustics fresh from the plough, and were far

better furnished with arms [Pl. XLIII, 8, 10] and armour

than the raw and undisciplined masses of the fyrd. A course

of almost unbroken victory led to the rapid growth of the

Viking bands : in the second generation they began to raid

far inland, and to fortify for themselves permanent camps on

convenient islands or headlands. A little later their confidence

grew so great that they took in hand the actual conquest of

England. In 867 they stormed York, slew the last two kings

of Northumbria, and firmly established themselves north of

the Humber. Mercia fell into their hands a little later, and

they would probably have mastered Wessex also but for the

military reforms of King Alfred, the saviour of England.

That great monarch was no sooner seated on the throne (871)

than he began to build a permanent war-fleet to oppose the

invaders even before they could get to land. Before this

scheme could be completed he had to fight hard against those

of the Danes who were already seated in England. The

decisive battle of Ethandun forced the Viking host to capitulate,

accept Christianity, and remove northward out of Wessex (878).

During the next fourteen years Alfred was busily engaged in

reorganizing the military strength of his realm. He con-

structed a large fleet of war-vessels of a size and speed exceed-

ing those of the enemy. He built strong burhs [Pl. XXXV, 1],

or fortified places in the chief strategical spots of Wessex,

PLATE XXXIV

A. High Angle Tower of Outer Ward. E. Middle Ward. H. Chapel.

I Moat. K. Gate to Inner Ward. M. Keep. O. Postern Tower.

P. Postern Gate. S. Gate. V. Outer Tower. Y. Stockade across

Seine. Z. The Great Ditch.

CHATEAU GAILLARD.

(From Viollet-le-Duc's L'Architecture Militaire.)

allotting to each of them a region whose warriors were to

supply the garrison and keep the works in repair. The burhs

were no more than improved copies of the original Anglo-

Saxon strongholds: they consisted of stockaded mounds sur-

rounded with ditches, and enclosed with outworks of a similar

kind: all was mere earthwork and palisading, for masonry

had hardly begun to be utilized for fortification. Though we

know that Alfred patched up the broken Roman walls of

London in 886, and that his daughter Ætheflæd a few years

later (907) did the same at Chester, yet such instances were

very rare. But ship-building and systematic fortification were

not the king's only devices. He carried out a great scheme

for strengthening his field army by adding to it as many fully-

equipped warriors as he could contrive. This was done by

taking into strict military dependence on the king, after the

manner of the comitatus of the early ages, all the larger landed

proprietors of the kingdom. Every holder of five hides of land,

whatever his birth and status, was to be made 'of thegn-right

worthy,' i.e. to take up both the privileges and the military

duties of a member of the king's war-band. For the word

thegn of late had superseded the earlier term of gesith as the

appellation of those who had become the king's men and joined

his following. The thegns, whether men of ancient noble

blood or newly enobled ceorls, had to serve in complete armour,

with iron helm and mail-shirt, like the Vikings whom they had

to oppose. They had to follow their lord whensoever he took

the field, which in the days of Alfred and his immediate

successors was very often. For example, during the years

892-896 almost continuous campaigning was in progress, while

the attack of Hastings, the greatest of the Viking chiefs, was

being beaten off from Wessex. The enlarged thegn-hood

formed the core of Alfred's army, but it was strengthened

by the fyrd, which was made more useful by dividing it into

two halves, of which one went out to war while the other

remained behind to till the land.

Alfred's descendants, Edward the Elder and Æthelstan,

carried on his system, and turned it to use for attacking

the Danes who had settled in England, as well as for

58

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

beating off their raids on Wessex. Edward was especially noted for his development9 of the use of burhs: he built great numbers of them, first along his own frontier, and then in the Danish districts which he subdued one after the other. These strongholds, with their garrisons of military settlers, proved too much for the enemy, who seldom succeeded in capturing them or shaking off the English supremacy when it had once been established. They often rebelled, and sometimes launched a desperate attack on Wessex, but such operations only resulted in a tremendous retaliatory raid by the English, who swept a whole region clear and left new burhs to hold it down. Now that they had farms to be burnt and cattle to be plundered, the Vikings no longer possessed their old superiority over the English in the matter of mobility. They were obliged to take the defensive, and had no longer the movable base depending on their ships which had been the strength of their ancestors. At last the men of the Danelaw came to the conclusion that submission might pay better than resistance. The decisive battle of Brunanburh (937) in which King Æthelstan defeated a great confederacy of English Danes, Scots, and Vikings from Ireland and the north, finally settled the fate of England. The surviving Scandinavian settlers submitted, and though they gave trouble once and again to Æthelstan's successors, became in a single generation very good Englishmen.

The Danish wars thus left their mark on the country in the development of the burhs, in the enlargement of the thegnhood, and generally in the creation of a certain tendency towards feudalism. To protect themselves in that century of storm and stress the smaller freemen had begun to commend themselves to the thegns, just as the thegns were forced to put themselves in direct dependence on the king. By the middle of the tenth century and the time of King Edgar the 'lordless man' had become an anomaly, on whom the law looked askance.

The short tenure of power by the Danish dynasty of Cnut, which followed the fall of Æthelred the Redeless, left one permanent mark on the military institutions of England. It was Cnut who first conceived the idea of a standing army. When the rest of his host returned to Denmark in 1015 he

PLATE XXXV

1. ANGLO-SAXON BURH :

LAUGHTON-EN-LE-MORTHEN, YORKS.

2. BEAUMARIS CASTLE :

PLAN.

3. BEAUMARIS CASTLE : ELEVATION.

4. HOOPED CANNON. 15TH CENT.

(Cotton MS. Julius, E. iv.).

5. BRONZE CANNON.

(Contemp. picture of Henry VIII's defence of Portsmouth: Brit. Mus.:

Leonard Barnard, Del.

ANGLO-SAXON PERIOD

59

kept about him several thousand picked mercenaries, whom

he called his huscarls or military household. They were, of

course (like the Anglo-Saxon gesiths of five centuries before),

only one more development of the old Teutonic comitatus of the

primitive king. But they were more permanently embodied,

received a definite pay, and were organized into a fixed number

of 'ships' crews.' Unlike the thegnhood they were not scattered

about on their lands, but were always concentrated under the

king's hand, so as to be ready for instant service. It seems to

have been Cnut's household troops who made popular in England

the great two-handed Danish axe with heavy head and five-foot

shaft [Pl. xliii, 10]. It was their special weapon, just as it

was that of the Viking bodyguard of the Eastern emperors at

Constantinople, the famous corps of the 'Varangians' whose

institution dates not long after that of Cnut's housecarls.

When the Danish dynasty passed away Edward the Con-

fessor continued to maintain under arms this picked body of

fighting men. But, with his usual unwisdom, he allowed his

great earls to do the same: Godwine, Leofric and Siward also

kept their halls full of housecarls, admirable aids in lawful

war, but tempting tools for rebellion. It was their existence

which made so natural the civil troubles of the Confessor's

reign.

The Anglo-Danish system of war, whose characteristic feature

was the formation of infantry in compact masses armed with

spear, axe, and shield, was brought to a sudden end by the first

great battle in English history of which we have a full account,

the great fight of Hastings. Then for the first time the old

national tactics were tried against the new methods that had

grown up on the continent, where the strength of armies now

consisted in their array of mailed horsemen, and the infantry

had become a subsidiary arm, mainly consisting of archers and

slingers used for the mere opening of the combat. Edward the

Confessor's Norman favourite, Ralph, Earl of Hereford, had tried

to teach the English thegns horsemanship, but had failed: his

levies fled when opposed to the Welsh, quia Anglos contra morem

in equis pugnare iussit (1055). It was to be disastrous to the land

that its fighting men were so reluctant to learn, for eleven years

60

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

later the presence of a few thousand cavalry on Harold's side would undoubtedly have changed the event of Hastings.

At that decisive fight the English king drew up his host in a dense mass along the brow of a steep hillside, throwing up for the protection of the front line a rough defence, a ditch and a hasty fence of stakes and wattled boughs, hewn from the great forest of the Andredsweald which lay just at his back.

He trusted in this manner to beat back the charge of the Norman horse, whose efficiency he had learnt to respect, since he himself had served a campaign with Duke William a few years back.

In the centre were his housecarls with their axes, around the two royal standards of the Dragon and the Fighting Man : on each side were the levies of the shires, in which the well-equipped men [Pl. xliv, 2] were outnumbered by the unarmoured rustics bearing a motley equipment of spears, axes, clubs, and swords.

Duke William, on the other hand, advanced up the hillside in a looser array : first came a line of archers [Pl. xliv, 3] and crossbowmen, then another of infantry with spear and shield, in the third the flower of the host, the feudal horse [Pl. xliv, 4] of Normandy and the mounted mercenaries gathered from all parts of Europe for the great enterprise.

The incidents of the battle are related in the ordinary histories : the military lesson taught at Hastings was that the purely defensive system of the Anglo-Danish infantry was insufficient to resist cavalry and archers skilfully combined by a capable general.

William won because he was able to use two sorts of tactics against an enemy who had only one.

A passive defensive by an army without good missile weapons is hopeless against an adversary who employs the combination of missiles and of cavalry charges.

2. From the Norman Conquest to the Accession of Edward I.

The Norman Conquest brought about a complete change in the military organization of England.

For the mailed axeman fighting on foot, and the concentric palisades of the burh [Pl. xxxv, 1], there were substituted the feudal horseman and

PLATE XXXVI

SIEGE OPERATIONS BEFORE CONISBROUGH

(From MS. Cott. Aug. II. 106)

NORMAN CONQUEST TO EDWARD I

61

the massive stone walls of the Norman castle. William the

Conqueror and his sons called out the footmen of the fyrd on

more than one occasion, but it was not the chief strength of

their hosts, and indeed they generally used it only when the

baronage and knighthood was for some reason or other not to

be trusted. The cavalry, which during this period formed the

really important part of the armed forces of the Crown, was

raised on a principle new in England though familiar enough

on the continent. William divided four-fifths of the soil of

England among the military adventurers who had followed

him: on each of the new landholders there was imposed the

duty of producing a certain fixed number of knights at the

king's call: the quota varied from a single 'shield' up to many

scores. The assessment was made very roughly, but at the

bottom of it there seems to have lain the old English notion

that a five-hide unit should produce a fully armed fighting man.

But the church and many of the lay holders were let off easily,

and gave much less than their hidage would have justified. The

surviving Anglo-Saxon landholders, who had 'bought back their

lands' from the king, had to fall into line with the newcomers,

and to take up the duties of knight-service. The tenants-in-chief

were allowed to provide their quota of horsemen in whatever

way they pleased: some maintained knights in their household,

but the majority granted out small estates to sub-tenants on the

feudal obligations. As long as the due number of shields was

forthcoming the king made no objection. The process of sub-

infeudation was tolerably complete by the time of Henry I, and

the vetus feoffamentum, or old enfeoffment, was technically

supposed to end on the day of his death. Later grants of land

were said to belong to the novum feoffamentum.

For two centuries after the Conquest the military equipment

of the knight varied little: an account of his body-armour will

be found in the section on Costume.

Along with the mailed knight the Norman Conquest made

England familiar with the stone-built castle. When William

reached England the only known type of fortification was the

palisaded burh. Much of his building consisted in the mere

repairing and enlarging of the old English strongholds, and he

62

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

built many wooden castles of his own. But he also introduced

the square stone keep, of which the Tower of London is the

best-known example. The famous 'White Tower' is a huge

quadrangular structure more than a hundred feet square, built

of rudely-coursed rubble with a vast amount of mortar. The

walls were fifteen feet thick, the windows were small and placed

high up, the entrance was by a well-protected door on the first

storey. This solidity made the keep impregnable against all

the siege-craft of that day, even when it was not surrounded by

any outworks. Such a building could hardly be battered down,

and at best could only be injured by undermining. If the keep

stood on a rock even this was impossible, and starvation was

the besiegers only sure weapon. As a perfected type of the

square keep Norwich Castle [Pl. xxxiii, 1] may be studied.

The square keep, however, was not the most common type of

Norman castle. Much more usual in the early twelfth century

was the 'shell-keep,' which was composed of a ring of wall

surrounding an open space. This type was produced by the

simple process of replacing the palisade of a Saxon burh by

a stone wall. The crest of the mound was much better guarded

by the more solid structure: the ground within was still avail-

able for buildings of stone or wood, which were generally built

against the encircling rampart. Berkeley [Pl. xxxiii, 2] and

Arundel among the better-known English castles show clear

traces of having developed from a simple shell-keep.

Both the solid keep of the type of the Tower of London, and

the hollow shell-keep of the type of Berkeley, soon had outer

defences added to them. It was obviously an advantage to

surround the original structure with ditches, palisades, and

eventually outer walls of masonry. The keep, with its limited

area, could only hold a small garrison, but into the wider space

enclosed by the outer ring of defences the whole of the cattle and

stores of the country-side could be removed in times of stress.

Ultimately the outer fortifications were strengthened, till they

formed the main line of resistance, the keep becoming merely

the last refuge of the defenders. The relation of the exterior

and inner structures to each other varied in every instance, as

the outward growth of the castle from its central nucleus was

PLATE

XXXVII

ASSAULT

FROM

THE

TOWER.

From

Viollet-le-Duc's

"La

Cité

de

Dieux"

NORMAN CONQUEST TO EDWARD I

63

determined by the lie of the ground, and not by any general

principle of military architecture. It is more usual to find the

keep at one end than in the exact centre of the whole system

of walls. Castle building in the later twelfth century began to

be largely affected by ideas brought home from the East by

the Crusaders, who had been studying the scientific military

architecture of the Byzantines and Saracens. Two main ten-

dencies may be ascribed to this Eastern influence : the plan of

strengthening the external walls by setting towers in them, and

the systematic as opposed to the empirical development of con-

centric lines of defence. The advantage of the tower was

obvious : as long as the outer wall of the castle consisted of long

stretches of plain 'curtain,' a besieger pushing trenches and

mines against it was exposed only to missiles launched from the

narrow front which he attacked. But projecting towers, set in

the wall, gave the besieged the power of launching a flanking

fire also upon the assailant, as soon as he drew near the point

in the defences which he proposed to force. It was the object

of the skilled military architect to construct his wall so that the

besieger should find no 'dead angles,' unsearched by missiles,

along which he might push forward his approaches.

The purpose of the multiplied outer lines of defence is

obvious : the besieger must force them before he can seriously

attack the main body of the place, and thus loses time.

Richard I, fresh from the Holy Land, built in 1196 the best and

strongest castle that the West had yet seen, namely, Château

Gaillard [Pl. xxxiv], which blocks the course of the Seine above

Rouen. In it we find all the newest ideas of fortification ;

indeed, this stronghold is twenty years ahead of any other

English or French fortress. It has two 'outer wards,' well set

with circular towers, and one 'inner ward,' in the wall of which

the keep is inserted. The last-named building is not square,

like the early Norman towers, but rounded, so as to offer no

'dead angles' to the besieger, and furnished with 'machicola-

tions' or projecting galleries with holes pierced in their foot-

way, through which shots can be discharged downward or

stones and liquids poured on the heads of foes who have

arrived at the foot of the wall. Stone machicolation seems to

64

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

have been quite a new device at the time [Plates xxxviII, 2 ;

xxxix, 1, 2]; earlier castle-builders had been content to use

wooden hoardings (brattices) for the purpose, which had the

disadvantage of being very inflammable [Plates xxxvi ; xxxviI ;

xxxviII, 1].

All through the time of the Anglo-Norman and early Planta-

genet kings the skill of the military architect was developing

with great rapidity, while the machinery of siege-craft was very

little improved. The ascendency which the defensive had

gained over the offensive was maintained till the invention

of gunpowder in the fourteenth century. When castles or

towns fell it was generally by famine. The cheapest way to

deal with a rebel was not to waste time or lives by trying to

storm his stronghold, but to block up its exists, and starve him

out. The period 1066-1300 was essentially one of sieges, not

of great battles in the open. Rufus and Henry I when dealing

with their restless barons, Stephen when contending with

Matilda, Henry II when warring against rebels at home and

foreign enemies abroad, conducted countless leaguers, but in

their time there were only two great battles, that of Northallerton

in 1178 and Lincoln in 1141. Tenchebrai and Bremûle, Aln-

wick and Fornham were little more than cavalry skirmishes.

When, for one reason or another, a siege was pressed hard,

and not turned into a mere blockade, the military engines em-

ployed were simple. They were the mangonel, the balista, and

the trébuchet, which worked respectively by torsion, by tension,

and by counterpoise. The mangonel was a machine for throw-

ing heavy stones : it was composed of two fixed uprights, and

a movable beam worked by the twisting of ropes, which, when

drawn back and then suddenly released, cast the missile through

the air in a high curve [see in Pl. xxxvi]. The balista, on the

other hand, was essentially a device for shooting great bolts

and javelins ; it was like an enormous crossbow, and cast its

missiles point blank, not with a high trajectory like the man-

gonel. The trébuchet [see in Pl. xxxvi] consisted of a balance

with a long beam : one end was loaded with heavy weights, in

the other, which was dragged down by force, the missile was

placed ; when the weighted end was released, it threw the other

PLATE XXXVIII

2. CURTAIN WALL WITH MACHICOLATION.

(from Viollet le Duc Dict. Militaires)

1. CURTAIN WALL WITH BATTLEMENTS.

NORMAN CONQUEST TO EDWARD I.

65

end violently into the air, and the missile sped on its way.

This device was later than the other two, and did not grow

popular till the thirteenth century. Much confusion is caused

to the reader of chronicles by the tiresome vagueness of the

nomenclature employed by many of the medieval writers, who

use the names of military machines in the most inexact and

confusing manner. When we read of tormenta, catapults, per-

rières, slings, biffae, springals, and so forth, it is often extremely

difficult to discover which of these engines is really meant.

But it is certain that all belonged to one of the three classes

which we have defined above.

Much more effective than mangonels or trébuchcts were two other

methods of attack, that by the mine and that by the 'movable

tower.' When a castle was built on soft ground, and was not

protected by a wet ditch, mining was likely to be success-

ful. The mine was driven under ground till the wall was

reached : stones were then removed from the latter, and the

breach was underpinned, that is supported, with beams, among

which were thrust straw and brushwood. When this was

ignited and the beams were burnt through, the wall collapsed

and a practicable breach was formed. Two well-known ex-

amples of the successful use of mining in English history are

the capture of Rochester Castle by King John in 1214, and that

of Bedford Castle by the Justiciar De Burgh in 1224. The use

of the movable tower (beffroi, belfragium) required more skill :

it was a wooden structure several storeys high protected from

fire by raw hides or metal plates. It was moved forward on

rollers till it reached the wall, the ditch, if there was one, being

filled with fascines and so levelled up to the height of the

adjacent ground. When the tower neared the rampart, a draw-

bridge was dropped from it on to the battlements, and the

besiegers, who could thus throw a column against a thin line of

defenders, rushed across to overpower the garrison [Pl. xxxvir].

The best remembered siege in which the place fell before this

machine was that of Jerusalem by the Crusaders in 1099 :

Richard I employed it at Acre, but it was famine rather than

engineering which really reduced that stronghold.

A marked feature of the military history of England in the

BARNARD

F

66

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

later twelfth and early thirteenth centuries is the great extent to which professional mercenary troops were employed.

The feudal levy, being theoretically liable to serve only for forty days consecutively, was an unsuitable weapon for protracted warfare.

Hence came the idea of scutage, by which the king offered his vassals the chance of paying a sum of money for every shield (scutum) that they were bound to furnish instead of serving in person.

The practice was begun by Henry I, but only became common under his grandson Henry II.

The money thus obtained, usually two marks (26s. 8d.) per shield, could be spent on hiring mercenaries, who were not only better disciplined and more efficient soldiers, but were prepared to keep the field for any length of time so long as their pay was forthcoming.

Most of Henry II's foreign wars were fought with their aid: Richard I and John employed them by the thousand.

It will be remembered that a special clause in Magna Carta is devoted to the banishment of the foreign men-at-arms and crossbowmen, qui venerunt cum armis et equis ad nocumentum regni.

Henry III was less well provided with such followers, but only because his tried financial incapacity rendered him incapable of paying them.

We hear of his employing mercenaries at Taillebourg, but Lewes and Evesham were fought out with purely native troops.

Though the feudal horsemen, supplemented by hired professional soldiers, did most of the fighting under the early Plantagenets, it must not be supposed that the national levy, the descendant of the Old English fyrd, had been allowed to be forgotten.

It was called out for domestic troubles and to repel Welsh and Scottish raids.

The sheriff, among his many and varied duties, was charged with that of leading the men of his shire whenever they were summoned.

We have valuable information as to their equipment from the two Assizes of Arms of Henry II (1181) and Henry III (1252).

In the former the richer men, with property worth more than sixteen marks, are bidden to appear with lances, hauberks of mail, and helms; those with less than sixteen and more than ten marks are to have lances, hauberks, or gambesons and steel caps, while the poorer classes came unarmoured and with 'swords, knives, and

PLATE XXXIX

BATTLEMENTS AND MACHINATION OF A TOWER.

(From Viollet le-Duc's Dictionnaire Militaire)

TOWER AND PORTION OF A CURTAIN.

PREDOMINANCE OF THE LONGBOW

67

any sort of smaller arms.' In the Assize of Henry III we find

an important change, in that all men with more than 40s. and

less than 100s. in land, and burgesses with chattels worth more

than nine and less than twenty marks, are commanded to take

the field with a bow and arrows instead of the lance prescribed

by the earlier ordinance. This is the first indication of the rise

of archery in England. In the twelfth century crossbowmen

were more esteemed than archers, and it had not occurred

to Henry II to order any class of his subjects to furnish them-

selves with the weapon which in later generations was to be

the special pride of the island.

3. The Predominance of the Longbow. 1272-1485.

The appearance of the longbow as a national weapon in

the Assize of Arms of 1252 is the dividing line in the military

history of medieval England. Down to that date the feudal

horseman was the chief power in battle, and the art of war in

England was but a reflection of that of the Continent. But

a new system was about to develop itself, unlike any that had

been seen in any other European country, in which the efficiency

of infantry armed with missile weapons was to be the main

factor. Simon de Montfort was the last English general who

won his victories by the charge of heavy cavalry alone : his

great pupil, Edward I, was to be the first who turned the archer

to full account.

The bow had always been known in England, we have even

seen it play a notable part in battle at Hastings, but it had

never, till the second half of the thirteenth century, been

considered a weapon of primary importance. The first district

whose archers win special notice is South Wales, and it seems

likely that trom there improved archery spread over the Western

Midlands. In the end of the twelfth century Giraldus Cam-

brensis praises the 'stiff, large, and strong bows' of the men of

Gwent, and tells how the Anglo-Normans could never have

conquered Ireland without the aid of the shafts of their Welsh

auxiliaries. Yet the crossbowman plays a much greater part

F 2

68

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

than the archer in the wars of Richard I, John, and Henry III,

and we are somewhat surprised when we find the bow prescribed

as the natural weapon of the yeomanry in the Assize of Arms of

1252. Nothing is said of the efficiency of archers at Lewes and

Evesham, and it is only when we arrive at the reign of Edward I

that we find the bowman coming to the front. The first note is

struck in 1282, when we are told that the army of Llewellyn was

beaten at the fight of Orewin Bridge, because the English broke

up the firm array of spearmen by pouring in volleys of arrows

before the cavalry was allowed to charge. The same plan was

used against the bands of the rebel prince Madoc in 1295. But

the first full account of the scientific use of archery that we get

is at Falkirk in 1298. Wallace had arrayed his Scots in four

great masses, 'schiltrons' as the chroniclers call them. The

first attack of the English cavalry upon these solid clumps of

pikemen was a complete failure. Then King Edward drew

back his knights and brought forward his bowmen (most of

whom, as we are incidentally told, were Welsh). He concen-

trated their discharges on certain parts of the hostile masses,

and when these were riddled with arrows, sent his cavalry into

the shaken spots. The charge was completely successful, and

the Scots were ridden down and cut to pieces.

This was almost a repetition of the tactics of William the

Conqueror at Hastings, where cavalry and archers had been

used in much the same way. Yet the victory did not make

such an impression on English commanders as might have been

expected. Edward II at Bannockburn (1314) did not copy his

great father's tactics, but tried to break up Bruce's host by

a mere frontal attack of cavalry. The Scottish pikemen, well

posted behind a marshy burn, and with their front protected by

small pitfalls, 'pottes' as Barbour calls them, kept the English

knighthood at bay without much difficulty, and finally hurled

them back across the water with great loss. Edward had

brought many archers to the field, but did not know how to

use them. 'He put them behind the knights, instead of on

their flanks' wrote Baker of Swinbrooke, 'and bade them fire

over their heads : hence they hit some few Scots in the breast,

but struck many more of their own friends in the back.' At one

PLATE XL

Marsh thus

Woods thus

Castle

Stirling

Cambuskenneth

Abbey

The

Kings

Park

Bannock

Burn

River

Forth

Scottish

Camp

Coxet

Hill

Gillies

Hill

Bannock

Burn

St

Ninians

The

Borestane

Milton

Bog

Sauchie

Burn

BANNOCKBURN.

June

24

Scots

English

Horses

Foot

Horses

Foot

A.

Edward

G.

Gloucester

Bruce

and

Hereford

B.

Moray

H.

King

C.

Douglas

I.

Site

D.

The

King

of

Cliffords

E.

Keith

Fight

on

the

F.F

The

Pots

23

I.

English Army.

French Army.

Men at Arms

Archers

Men at Arms

Cross

Bowmen

A.

Prince

Edward

G.

Genoese.

B.

Earl

of

Northampton

F.F

Count

of

Alençon

C.

The

King

E.E.

Duke

of

Lorraine

D.

The

Kings

Windmill

H.H.

Rendezvous

to

the

Front

CRÉCY,

Aug.

To

Rue

and

Groy

Bois

de

Grange

English

Waggon

Park

Madicourt

Crécy

Forest

of

Crécy

Abbeville

R.

Maye

Cross

of

the

King

of

Bohemia

Fountaine

To

Amiens

Estrees

PREDOMINANCE OF THE LONGBOW

69

moment of the battle some of the bowmen on the English left

did push to the front; but Bruce ordered them to be charged

in flank by a small cavalry reserve which he had set aside, and

they were ridden down or scattered for want of protection from

the knights [Pl. xl, 1].

The lesson which Edward II had failed to learn from Falkirk

had not been lost on more capable men. The reign of Edward III

opens with two astounding victories for the archer: the first was

that of Dupplin (1332), won by Edward Balliol and his English

auxiliaries over the partisans of David Bruce. The invaders of

Scotland dismounted their men-at-arms and formed them in a

solid mass, while arraying their bowmen in thin crescent-shaped

wings on either hand. The Scots, attacking in massive columns,

were shot down so rapidly by the concentric rain of shafts, that

they broke and fled before they had succeeded in overwhelming

Balliol's small body of dismounted cavalry. Halidon Hill (1333)

was an exact reproduction of Dupplin on a larger scale: most of

the victors of the former fight were present, and we cannot doubt

that it was they who induced the young Edward III to copy the

successful tactics of the preceding year. The English were

drawn up on a hillside, in three 'battles' each furnished with

small wings. The knights and men-at-arms stood dismounted

in the centre, the archery in loose array was strung out on

either flank. The Scots, plunging straight into the snare in

heavy masses, were checked by the lances in front, and shot

down by the arrows from both sides till after dreadful slaughter

they had to retire: then the victors mounted their horses and

chased them for many miles. Hic didicit a Scotis, says Baker,

Anglorum generositas dextrarios reservare venationi hostium, et

contra morem suorum patrum pedes pugnare.

The tactics of Dupplin and Halidon Hill were transported to

the Continent with great success when Edward III became

involved in his French wars. In his first Flemish and Breton

campaigns he did not get the chance of applying them, the

French declining a pitched battle, and the English army being

overweighted with German and Netherlandish auxiliaries. But

at Crécy (1346) we recognize at once the methods of the Scottish

war, though the enemy was no longer composed of masses of

70

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

pikemen but of squadrons of feudal horsemen. Edward's front

line was composed of two 'battles' of dismounted men-at-arms,

each 1,200 strong with three or four thousand archers arrayed

on its wings. The bowmen stood in equal divisions on the

flanks of the knights, somewhat thrown forward, so that the

dismounted cavalry were, as Froissart remarks, au fond de la

bataille [Pl. xL, 2]. The French army had not foreseen a fight

that day, and came quite unexpectedly upon the English host.

King Philip VI tried to hold his vassals back, and to draw up

some sort of order of battle. But the rash and undisciplined

French baronage pressed forward so heedlessly that an engage-

ment became inevitable. A line of Genoese mercenary cross-

bowmen was first thrown out, but the archers shot them down

almost before they had got into range with their clumsy weapons.

Then the French noblesse charged : to their surprise they found

that they could hardly reach the English line : the archers slew

horses and men in such numbers that a bank of dead and

wounded was built up in front of them, and the whole mass was

brought to a standstill. More squadrons came pushing up from

the rear, and in spite of the carnage the French several times

got to handstrokes with the English dismounted men-at-arms.

But they failed to break through them, and meanwhile the storm

of arrows was always beating upon their flanks. After fifteen

or sixteen fruitless onsets the ranks of the assailants were so

thinned and their spirit so broken that they melted away to the

rear, leaving 1,500 barons and knights and 10,000 meaner men

dead in front of the English line.

This astonishing victory made a deep impression all over the

Continent, and marked the commencement of that ascendency of

the English infantry in war which was to last for a full century.

For the next four generations the tactics first seen at Dupplin

Moor dominated Western Europe: the English armies were

invariably arrayed with clumps of dismounted men-at-arms in

the centre, and with lines of archers on the wings. They tried

to choose a favourable position, with clear ground in front and

obstacles to cover their flanks, and then waited to be attacked.

As long as their enemies were obliging enough to deliver frontal

assaults upon them, they never failed to gain the victory.

Plate XLI

BATTLE of POICTIERS.

Sept. 19th 1356.

Beauvoir

½

English

Mounted

Dismounted

French

A Warwick & Oxford

B. Salisbury & Suffolk.

C. The Prince of Wales.

D. Probable route of the

Captal de Buch.

E. The Marsnalls and the

Germans

F The Dauphin.

G The Duke of Orleans

H. King John

I.

BATTLE of

AGINCOURT. 1415.

A

B

C

D

E

F

F.A.

B.B.

C.C.

D.E.F.

PREDOMINANCE OF THE LONGBOW

71

Poictiers (1356) resembled Creçy in many of its details, but had its own peculiar features [Pl: xli, 1]. John of France, remembering the slaughter of horses in the earlier battle, dismounted his knights and bade them attack the English position on foot; but he sent forward a forlorn hope of a few hundred cavalry, who were to try to break into the weakest spot of the Black Prince's front. This advance guard of mounted men was easily shot down : the columns of mailed knights on foot, however, succeeded in struggling up to the line and getting to hand-to-hand fighting. But they could not break through. The two leading columns had been driven off the field, when the French king with his reserve advanced for a last effort. When he was halfway up the slope, the Prince of Wales massed his wearied troops, bade them quit their line of hedge, and charged down hill. He also sent off a small detachment to make a circuit to the right and fall upon the king's flank. This sudden assault was successful: dispirited by the repulse of their main body, the French third line gave way, and when threatened by the demonstration against their flank, broke and fled. King John, refusing to turn back, was captured together with his son Philip and his most faithful retainers.

Thus the English system of tactics proved as successful against dismounted men-at-arms at Poictiers as it had against mounted squadrons at Creçy. If any further confirmation of its excellence was required, the Black Prince's victory at Navarette (1367) over the numerous light horse of John of Castille was sufficient evidence. Aljubarotta (1385), a success won by the Portuguese over the Spaniards and French, may also be mentioned. The victor was assisted by English auxiliaries and adopted English methods, closely copying the arrangements of Poictiers.

If Edward III was ultimately unsuccessful in his attack on France it was not owing to any fault in his tactics, but purely because the enemy made up his mind to refuse pitched battles, and wearied out the English by scattered raids and long sieges. The next century was to show that the system of Dupplin Moor and Creçy was as effective as ever under the proper conditions.

The equipment of the knights who fought under Edward III is described in the Section on Costume. Plate armour

72

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

was now superseding chain-mail, but the increased protec-

tion it gave to the body was won at the cost of a notable

addition of weight; the knight of 1350, with his elaborate

double sheathing, of plate laid above the original mail, had lost

the power of rapid and easy movement which the knight of

1250 had still possessed. He tired sooner, could not walk far

or long when he dismounted, and when he had lost his footing

found it difficult to rise again. But fashion persisted in adding

extra pieces to his panoply, and the development of the long-

bow with its penetrating shaft tempted the armourer to make

the plate even thicker and heavier. By the fifteenth century

its weight had become so overwhelming that a man-at-arms

once overthrown was quite at the mercy of his enemy, and that

combatants were not unfrequently exhausted by a short fight

to such an extent that they were actually stifled in their

armour, and died without having received any mortal wound.

In the matter of military architecture the medieval system

had reached its perfection in the time of Edward I. The

principle of concentric fortification, the first great development

of which had been seen in the Château Gaillard, had become

universally accepted. All castles of the best type had now

several lines of defence, which could be maintained one after

another even when the besieger had established a lodgement

step by step in the successive outworks. The elaborate ground-

plan of strongholds like Beaumaris [Pl. xxxv, 2, 3], Carnarvon,

or Caerphilly, deserves study as a model of ingenuity : so well

had defence been accumulated upon defence that they were prac-

tically impregnable against the most imposing array of perrières

and trébuchcts. It seemed as if the besieger was checkmated.

But only a generation later there arose a new power in

siege-craft which was to revolutionize all the old ideas : this was

gunpowder. Its origin is obscure, but goes back at least to

the second decade of the fourteenth century. The first powder

was ill-made and irregular in its effect : the earliest cannon were

small, clumsily built, and hard to work. But with all their

faults they revolutionized the relations of the offensive and the

defensive. Cannon could batter down walls of a solidity which

would have laughed to scorn all manner of mangonels and

PREDOMINANCE OF THE LONGBOW

73

catapults. The most perfect fortresses of the elder age, even

the famous triple walls of Constantinople itself, proved helpless

before the new invention. Its beginnings, however, were

modest. We have some evidence that cannon of a primitive

sort, ‘crakys of war’ the chronicler calls them, were used at

Edward III's siege of Berwick in 1333. But it is certain that

in 1338 the French fleet which attacked Southampton was pro-

vided with a pot de fer and three pounds of gunpowder for

shooting iron bolts, and that, later in the same year, pouldres et

canons were employed against the English castle of Puy Guil-

hem in Aquitaine. The first clear mention of their use on this

side of the Channel is in 1344, when the king directed one

Thomas de Roldeston, his chief engineer, to make powder for

his guns. One of Roldeston's accounts shows that he had to

pay eighteenpence a pound for saltpetre and eightpence for

sulphur, so that powder was a very costly compound in those

days. But its use spread rapidly: in 1346-7 Edward had a

considerable battering train of siege guns at the leaguer of

Calais. On the other hand, it is most unlikely that, as some

chronicles assert, he had guns at Crécy, for the cannon of the

day were too heavy and clumsy for the forced marches which

he had been executing just before that battle, and it is many

years later before we find them employed for field (as opposed

to siege) work.

The art of metal-casting was in its infancy in the fourteenth

century, and the first molten guns, small though they were,

were so liable to flaws and airholes, which made them burst

after a little use, that for a time they were unpopular. Instead,

bars of approved quality were welded together around a

wooden core; and then clamped by four or five iron hoops to

keep them still more solidly compacted. When the core was

withdrawn, a practicable gun was the result [Pl. xxxv, 4]. But

the hooped guns were hardly less dangerous than the cast ones,

for after a time the welding gave way at some point, and an

unlucky discharge resolved the engine into its component parts,

and sent them flying in all directions. It was an accident of

this kind which slew James II of Scotland at the siege of

Roxburgh (1460).

74

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

As years went on and both gun-founders and powder-makers grew more skilful, the advantage of the offensive over

the defensive grew more and more marked, and famine ceased to be the besieger's best weapon. After a time the besieged

also took to using cannon, to oppose the enemy's fire, search his trenches, and beat down his palisades. But the older type

of fortress did not easily lend itself to the use of artillery, for the ramparts were generally too narrow, and where they were not,

the constant recoil of the pieces was found to shake the walls. Sometimes the defender's cannon had to be withdrawn because

it was doing as much damage to the walls as was that of the besieger. Artillery in fact ultimately forced military engineers

to take in hand the general reconstruction of strongholds, and to cease putting all their trust in high walls of hewn stone.

But this development came much later than the times with which we are now dealing. There was so little civil war in

England between 1320 and 1460 that the need for reconstruction did not make itself felt.

The reigns of Richard II and Henry IV make a practical break in the history of the great continental wars of England,

though we must not forget episodes like John of Gaunt's expedition to Castile (1385), or Clarence's presence with English

auxiliaries at the battle of St. Cloud (1411). But when the second act of the Hundred Years' War commenced, with

Henry V's siege of Harfleur, we find that the tactics of English and French alike had altered little during the forty years of

comparative peace that had gone by. The French had learnt nothing in their civil wars nor in their Flemish campaigns, and

Homildon Hill and Shrewsbury had only confirmed the English in their confidence in the longbow. Agincourt, therefore,

reads like a mere repetition of Poictiers. Henry V, like the Black Prince, took up the best position he could find [Pl. xli, 2],

covered with woods on both flanks, and arrayed his men in three corps, each composed of a central mass of dismounted

men-at-arms with wings of archers. He only improved on his great-uncle's arrangements by giving his archers iron-shod

stakes, which they arranged in front of themselves, as chevaux-de-frise, to keep off cavalry. The Constable of France (like King

PREDOMINANCE OF THE LONGBOW

75

John at Poictiers) formed three heavy lines of dismounted men-

at-arms, and sent on in front of them a forlorn hope of picked

knights on horseback. The main difference between the two

fights lay in the fact that at Poictiers the two armies had

between them a scrubby hillside, and at Agincourt newly

ploughed fields sodden with ten days of rain. At the second

battle, as at the first, the French mounted men were shot down

long before they could close. But when the masses of men-at-

arms on foot came up, they were so riddled with arrows, so

embogged in the deep mud, and so tired by walking a mile in

their heavy armour, that they came to a complete standstill in

front of King Henry's line. The English, in spite of their

inferior numbers, saw the enemy reduced to such helplessness

that they were emboldened to charge. The result was an easy

victory: the French lines were hurled one on another in

complete helplessness : men fell in heaps and were stifled as

they lay. The English archers flung down their bows and

beat upon the armour of the crowded knights with swords and

mallets 'like smiths hammering upon anvils,' till all who stayed

behind had been overthrown and the rest had fled [Pl. xlvii, 2, 3].

No battle of such importance as Agincourt was fought during

the rest of the war, which became for the next ten years mainly

an affair of sieges. Even to deliver Rouen in 1418, the French

did not fight a general action. But when they did consent to

come out into the open, they showed that they had learnt little.

At Cravant, at Verneuil, and again at the 'Battle of the

Herrings,' they kept trying to break the English line of lances

flanked with bows by headlong onslaughts of mailed men-at-arms,

sometimes mounted, but generally on foot. Defeat was always

bloody, for in their cumbrous panoply the dismounted knights

could not get away, and were easily caught by the pursuer.

When the English advance came to a final stand before

Orleans in 1429, and the French, inspired by Joan of Arc,

began to recover ground, the turning-point of the war was not

a battle but a siege. Bedford was trying to accomplish the

impossible, to conquer a whole kingdom with an army that

never mustered 15,000 or 20,000 men. Orleans, considered as

a siege, was almost farcical. The besiegers with some 4,000

76

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

men tried to cover a front of four or five miles : they could not surround the place, but merely built bastilles in front of its gates. Reinforcements and supplies slipped in without much trouble, and when Joan led the garrison to the attack of the bastilles, the handful of men entrenched in each could make no effective resistance. There is more military interest in the subsequent battle of Patay, where the pursuing French attacked the retreating English 'before they could form a line, or the archers could fix their stakes.' They rushed in, caught the invaders in disorder, and routed them. From this moment the annals of the war, instead of consisting of a long list of French fortresses beleaguered and taken by the English, become an equally weary chronicle of English garrisons surrounded and slowly reduced by the French. The only pitched battles were fought in the very last years of the war. At Formigny (1450) the English army, advancing to the relief of Caen, was faced by a covering force, and took up a position in which it waited to be attacked. Bow and lance were holding their own, when a fresh French corps appeared from a different direction, and fell upon the flank and rear of the English. The thin line of archers and men-at-arms, ranged along a hedgeside, could not protect itself by forming a new front : it was rolled up, enveloped, and absolutely cut to pieces. The English tactics in fact were only certain of success if the flanks were absolutely safe, which at Formigny they were not, and if the enemy confined himself to frontal attacks.

Castillon, the last battle of the Hundred Years' War, differs in character from all the rest, in that the English attacked an entrenched position, instead of assuming the defensive in their usual style. The French had fortified themselves behind earthworks, on which they had planted much artillery. The aged Lord Talbot, a veteran of thirty years' service, threw away his previous reputation for capable generalship, by assailing the enemy's almost impregnable lines with a frontal attack. His men-at-arms dismounted and dashed at the earthworks, but were blown to pieces by the fire of the cannon, and recoiled in disorder ; the French then sallied out and cut both them and the archers to pieces, ere any order of battle could be re-established.

PREDOMINANCE OF THE LONGBOW

77

The armies with which the latter half of the Hundred Years’ War were fought were raised by a method which had become prevalent in the second part of the reign of Edward III. Instead of issuing Commissions of Array to raise shire-levies, as he had done in his earlier years, that monarch had taken, in his later campaigns, to procuring men by Indenture. By this system the king bargained with his knights and nobles, or even with professional mercenary captains, that they should enlist for his service contingents of volunteers. The number of soldiers to be procured was stated, as also the time for which the hire was made, and the rate at which the king was to pay. A typical indenture may be quoted as an example: on September 30, 1360, Edward III bargains with Thomas Earl of Kent that the latter shall raise sixty men-at-arms (of whom ten are to be knights) and 120 bowmen, all properly equipped and provided with horses. The term of hire is for three months, the rate is to be ‘the accustomed wages of war,’ and the sum is to be paid to the earl beforehand, that he may have ready money for fitting out the contingent. Such agreements were of course quite distinct from a vassal’s ordinary feudal obligations: they were private bargains which he made for his own profit.

Many English knights and nobles loved the military life so well that they remained over seas at the head of their companies for very long periods, and practically became professional soldiers. Similarly, a class of the same sort was developed to fill the ranks: the pay of a man-at-arms or an archer was high, considering the purchasing power of money in those days. The former received (1346) a shilling a day, the latter sixpence if he brought a horse, threepence if he was on foot. This, with the chance of plunder and ransom-money, was a very tempting maintenance for a man of the fourteenth or fifteenth century. It was at the head of such bands, skilled veterans with a keen eye for booty, that John of Gaunt, Henry V, or the Duke of Bedford, carried out their French campaigns. One of the most notable results of the final expulsion of the English from Normandy and Aquitaine in 1451-3, was that thousands of these professional mercenaries, accustomed for years to nothing

78

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

but war, were cast adrift without employment. Their presence was not the least important of the conditions which made the outbreak of the Wars of the Roses possible, and even probable. The idle hands were there, and the mischief was not long in coming.

The armies which fought for York or Lancaster had as their core the military households of the nobles, largely composed of the disbanded veterans from the French war, and the retainers gathered under the evil system of 'Livery and Maintenance.' This was a device by which great lords invited their smaller neighbours to put themselves under their protection, to wear their 'livery'—i. e. their badge, the Bear and Ragged Staff, or the Stafford Knot, or the Holland Cresset—and to be 'maintained,' i. e. championed, by them in their quarrels and lawsuits. In return the receiver of the livery undertook to turn out in arms at his patron's call. Wealthy knights and squires who could put a couple of hundred retainers into the field, did not think it beneath their dignity to accept the badge of a great earl like Warwick or Northumberland. It was not unknown for even a baron to place himself under the protection of one of the greater magnates. Both the Yorkists and the Lancastrians used to supplement their bands of partisans by issuing commissions of array to call out the shire levies. But the troops thus obtained were far less useful to them than their own liveried retainers, since the greater part of the nation would gladly have been neutral, and did not like to be forced to take a side, with the chance of discovering that it was the weaker one. Nothing can be more typical of public feeling than the fact that no town chose to stand a siege during the whole war. Whatever the temper of the citizens, they used to open their gates to any leader who appeared before them with a sufficient force. Even London, which passed as being a Yorkist stronghold, was ready to capitulate without a blow after the second battle of St. Albans.

The battles of the Wars of the Roses were fought on the old system of English tactics. Each party arrayed itself in three 'battles,' consisting of a central body of dismounted men-at-arms and billmen, with wings of archers. The army which was on

PREDOMINANCE OF THE LONGBOW

79

the defensive seized a hillside or a hedgerow and held it : the opposing troops strove to turn them out. The fights were usually bloody, because of the great force of excellent archery, and because the heavy armour of the man-at-arms made it impossible for him to fly with speed if his party was routed. The second battle of St. Albans, Towton, Barnet, and Tewkesbury were all first-class battles of this simple kind. Northampton was complicated by the fact that the Lancastrians had entrenched themselves and garnished their lines with cannon : but a severe rain-storm just before the engagement flooded their works, and drenched their powder, so that they got no profit from their precaution. At Edgecott the Yorkists had hardly any archers with them, and owed their defeat to the preponderant arrow-flight of the northern rebels. The first battle of St. Albans was little more than a scuffle on a large scale down the High Street of a small town.

The one new feature presented by the battles of the Wars of the Roses is that cannon were frequently employed in them : a new feature in English engagements. But it cannot be said that the artillery made much difference in the fate of the day. At Northampton it was drowned out by rain : at Barnet both sides shot at each other all night without any effective result. Only at the obscure fight of Lose-Coat Field (1470) does it seem to have acted effectively : there the Lincolnshire rebels, marching to surprise King Edward's camp, found him already arrayed to meet them, and were scattered by one general salvo of his guns. The smaller firearms are also heard of for the first time in this war. Warwick, at the second battle of St. Albans, had some Burgundian 'hand-gun men' [Pl. XLVII, 4] but they did him little service ; a storm, which beat in their faces and blew out their matches, seems to have utterly nonplussed them. Nor do we hear any good of a similar body of mercenaries, lent by Charles the Bold to Edward IV for his expedition to conquer England in 1471. The fact was that the longbow was still too effective to fear the competition of the clumsy tubes, mounted on wooden staves and fired by matches, which were the progenitors of the musket.

In sieges, however, firearms made their mark during the

80

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

Wars of the Roses. The castles of England were in 1460 much as they had been in 1260. During the long period of

practical freedom from civil war which had elapsed between Boroughbridge and the first fight at St. Albans (1322-1455), the

castle had ceased to play the prominent part in military and social life which it had occupied in earlier centuries. The only

serious rebellions in the intervening period, those of the Percies and Glendower in the time of Henry IV, had been purely local,

and did not influence the main body of the country. Hence castle-building had ceased to develop, and by the fifteenth

century the nobility, in the construction of their dwellings, had begun to consider comfort rather than defensive power.

The moated manor-house is more typical of the times than the castle proper, and nothing of first-rate importance in military

respects had been built since Edward I's great fortresses in Wales.

Cannon made short work of the old fastnesses. The best remembered sieges are those of Bamborough and Dunstan-

burgh (1465), when Warwick's artillery easily battered down the massive walls of the Percy strongholds. The only fortresses

which made very long defences were those unusually favoured by natural position, and placed in remote corners. Jasper

Tudor long held out in Harlech, and Oxford in St. Michael's Mount: both were difficult to get at with the short-ranged

artillery of that day, and it is possible that, owing to their inaccessibility, they were only blockaded and not battered. But

unfortunately details are wanting.

4. The Growth of Firearms and the Decline

of the Longbow. 1485–1602.

The Wars of the Roses had, for a whole generation, kept England practically out of continental politics. The attempts

of Edward IV to intervene in them had come to a most inglorious end. As a natural consequence we find that while

beyond the Channel the military art was going through a complete transformation, and assuming a more modern cha-

racter, in England it remained unchanged. The cautious

policy of Henry VII protracted this state of affairs into the

beginning of the sixteenth century. Abroad every monarch

was beginning to raise a standing army. The arquebus was

rapidly superseding the crossbow and all other missile weapons.

The pike of the Swiss and the Lanzknechts was at the height

of its reputation : the man-at-arms was relinquishing the habit

of dismounting for battle, which had been the rule since

Poictiers, and was once more charging on horseback. But

in England things went on in the old style of Creçy and

Agincourt, and no changes were to be seen till the sixteenth

century was well advanced.

The military importance of Henry VII's reign consists

rather in what he undid than in what he accomplished. His

great feat was the abolition of the evil custom of Livery and

Maintenance. The 'household men' and badged retainers,

who made rebellion so easy, were an abomination to him. He

made the giving of liveries and the making of private treaties

and agreements penal. Even his most faithful servant the Earl

of Oxford, the victor of Bosworth, was heavily fined for having

too many servants wearing the silver mullet of the De Veres.

In military organization Henry went back to the modes of

Edward III, and raised his armies mainly by commissions of

array to the counties, but partly by the indenture system.

From the tactical point of view his reign forms but a con-

tinuation on a small scale of the Wars of the Roses. In the

forms of battle, the use of arms and armour, and the arraying

of troops, we see little change. We still find the men-at-arms

dismounting to fight, and the archery ranging themselves on

the wings. It is worth noting that at Stoke Field, where the

Earl of Lincoln brought a number of German mercenaries to the

fray, bow and bill prevailed easily over pike and hand-gun. The

Lanzknechts of Martin Schwartz were shot down by the archery no

less than the Irish javelin-men of Fitzgerald. Blackheath Field,

on the other hand, shows another point of interest : Lord Audley

and the Cornishmen were routed, not for want of archery, but

for want of artillery. It is said that after the fight observers

noted that the rebels' bows averaged several inches more in

length than those of the men of the home counties who had

8a

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

come out in the king's behalf. But the thundering discharges

of the royal train of cannon, to which the Cornish had nothing

to oppose, settled the day. The fight may fairly be compared

to Edward IV's victory at Lose-Coat Field. The English

armies were seldom seen on the Continent during Henry VII's

reign : in the one important expedition, that of Lord Morley

to Flanders in 1491, the archers are said to have acquitted

themselves well against the French, whose entrenched camp by

Dixmuide they succeeded in capturing.

The only visible change was in armour : this had grown

heavier than ever [Pl. xlvi, 4], and from about 1490 to 1530

was at its most ponderous stage; it had become absolutely

impossible for a knight once overthrown to get on his legs

again, and a very short fight in such cumbrous panoply sufficed

to tire out the strongest man. The fact was that the armourers

were engaged in a vain attempt to cope with the penetrating

power of firearms, and had not yet confessed themselves beaten.

It was only in the middle of the sixteenth century that men began

to see that the contest must be given up, and that the practical

thing to do was to risk the balls, and win back some degree

of mobility by discarding as much as possible of the armour.

By 1530 it had reached the stage when it not only cumbered

its wearer, but prevented him from doing much harm to his

adversaries.

The reign of Henry VIII contrasts with that of his father

in that all the new influences in the military art began to cross

the Channel. The knights once more took to fighting habitually

on horseback, which they had not done since Bannockburn.

The pictures of the king's victory at Guinegate (the ' Battle

of the Spurs '), painted by his command, show his men-at-arms

riding forward in orderly squadrons of a deep formation.

Henry was a patron of firearms, not only of cannon but of

the smaller weapons also. He took great interest in his

foundry, where large bronze pieces [Pl. xxxv, 5], much more

effective than the hooped guns of the previous century, were

cast. His founders, Peter of Coln and Peter Baude, even made

for him shells, then a new invention: they are described

as 'hollow shot of iron filled with fireworks and fitted with

PLAN OF

BATTLE OF FLODDEN FIELD.

BRANKSTON MOOR

0

English

Scots

A. Edmund Howard

B. The Admiral

C. Sir M. Constable.

D. Lord Dacre

E. Earl of Surrey

F. Lord Stanley.

G. Home & Huntley

H. Crawford & Errol.

I. King James IV.

K. Bothwell.

L. Lennox & Argyll.

Twizel Bridge

Twizel Tower

R. Till

Ford

Till

Mill

Haulam Castle

Surrey's March

Till

Etal Castle

Ford Castle

Moss

Branxton

Hill

MOOR

BRANKSTON

CORN HILL

COLDSTREAM

Flodden Hill

Scotish Camp

DEVELOPMENT OF FIREARMS

83

a match, which broke into small pieces, whereof any hitting

a man did kill or spoil him ' (1543). In the second half of his

reign Henry often hired Germans and other mercenaries

armed with calivers and arquebuses, and seems to have induced

his own subjects to begin to employ these weapons.

But the bow was still the main arm of the English infantry :

it still had an enormous advantage in rapidity of discharge over

any sort of firearm, which quite compensated for its somewhat

inferior penetrating power. Flodden Field was its last great

victory : there the enemy was the same as at the old fights of

Dupplin Moor and Halidon Hill, the heavy masses of the

Scotch pikemen [Pl. xlii]. James IV, like so many of his

predecessors in the command of a Scottish host, made at Flod-

den the mistake of coming down from his position and making

a fierce frontal attack on Surrey's army. In different parts

of the field the fortunes of the day varied : but its main crisis

was settled, as at Falkirk and Halidon Hill, by the archery

shaking the Scottish main column, and the knights then

getting into the gaps. James and his nobles fought and died

valiantly around their standard, but could not resist the fatal

combination of arrow and lance.

Henry VIII, though constantly engaged in war, was not

himself a great general, nor did he succeed in finding one

among his followers. The most frequent cause of the mis-

carriage of his enterprises was the bad discipline which he kept

in his hosts. Military mutinies had been almost unknown

hitherto in English history : armies had been kept together by

the feudal obedience of vassals to their lords, or by the confi-

dence which the professional soldiers raised under indentures

felt in the veteran captains who hired them. But Henry's

troops were inspired by no such feelings : the old baronage

had been practically destroyed in the Wars of the Roses, and

the new families that had taken their places could not count

on any such fidelity from their retainers. Moreover the pro-

hibition of Livery and Maintenance struck at the roots of such

connexions. Henry's troops were shire-levies, hastily embodied

and sent over-sea under officers of whom they knew little, quite

unlike the old bands of Agincourt or Verneuil. His generals,

G 2

84

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

Dorset, Suffolk and the rest, seem to have had little control over them. Both the campaign of 1512 round St. Sebastian, and that of 1523 in Artois and Picardy came to a summary end owing to the army 'going on strike,' seizing shipping, and returning home. Henry himself was able to secure obedience by employing his usual drastic methods, but none of his lieutenants could do the like. Hence came many disgraceful scenes of indiscipline. This was enough, without other co-operating causes, to account for many of his military fiascos.

One of the facts which strikes us most forcibly in considering Henry's career is that it was well for England that he did not copy his continental contemporaries in raising a standing army. The Tudor despotism was bad enough as things stood, but if the king had been provided with a large permanent force of mercenaries, there would have been no check on his tyranny. Fortunately his unsound finance proved sufficient to prevent any such idea from being put into practice. Obliged to depend for military force on shire-levies and volunteers engaged for short periods, he had to take public opinion into consideration. There was a danger, as the 'Pilgrimage of Grace ' showed, that if he pressed matters too far he might find the whole country in arms, and have no force to defend him save his handfull of ' Gentlemen-pensioners ' and Yeomen of the Guard. Hence he was compelled to humour the nation in a fashion that must often have been galling to him.

It is perhaps worth noting that Henry was the first English sovereign who prescribed a fixed uniform for his army. In early reigns the wearing of the red St. George's cross as a distinguishing mark had been considered sufficient. But in his ordinance of 1543 the king commanded that the whole of his infantry should be furnished with blue coats trimmed with red, and parti-coloured breeches, of which one leg was to be red and one blue. The red cross was to be retained, and no one was to wear any other badge belonging to any captain or commander. Over their blue coats the billmen and archers [Pl. xlvii, 5, 6] generally wore a plain back-and-breast piece, or occasionally a leather 'jack.' The headgear consisted partly of the round steel cap usual in the previous generation, partly

DEVELOPMENT OF FIREARMS

85

of the morion, a pointed cap with a broad brim, somewhat

peaked in front and behind [Pl. LIII, 2].

There is little to note in the reigns of Edward VI and Mary,

in which the military practices of the time of their father were

simply continued. We seemed to trace an ever-growing use

of firearms, both great and small, but the bow was still the

main weapon of the infantry. At Pinkie, the last great battle

with the pikemen of Scotland, the men-at-arms charged the

hostile columns and were beaten off, but artillery was then

brought up and set to play upon the heavy masses with

fatal effect. When it had shaken them the cavalry charged

again, this time with complete success and murderous result.

We hear less of the archery than at Flodden, the last battle of

the old type. Indeed, Pinkie reminds us more of Marignano,

the great continental battle (1515) in which Francis I had beaten

the famous pikemen of Switzerland by combining cavalry

charges and salvos of artillery.

One token of the fact that we are leaving the Middle Ages

and approaching modern military phraseology is that during

the reign of Mary we find the first use of the word 'regiment'

in its present sense. The English contingent sent to the aid of

the Spaniards in the campaign of St. Quentin is officially called

'a regiment of 1,000 horse and 4,000 foot.' These troops con-

sisted of 500 'lances' (fully equipped men-at-arms), 500 'demi-

lances' (light horse), and 40 'bands' of foot-soldiers, each

consisting of 100 men under a captain, lieutenant, and 'ancient'

(ensign, of which 'ancient' is probably only a corrupt form).

Down to Mary's reign the shire-levy had been theoretically

under the command of the sheriff, as in early Norman and

Plantagenet days, though actually raised by commissions of array

for each county. Now a new officer, the 'Lord-Lieutenant,'

was created to take complete charge of the military affairs of

the county, the sheriff becoming a purely civil magistrate. The

new arrangement lasted down to the nineteenth century.

In Elizabeth's long reign the last traces of the old English

tactics of the Middle Ages disappear, and in things military

the nation falls into line with the practice of the Continent.

The main feature of the time is the complete decay of the long-

86

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

bow. In 1558 it was still the principal weapon of the infantry,

in 1597 its use was officially prohibited. All through the early

years of the reign it is still to the fore : in the siege of Leith

(1559-60) and in the first campaigns in France and Holland

we hear much of it. But the arquebusier and 'caliver-man'

were already arrayed alongside of the archer, as readers of

the famous Ballad of Lord Willoughby will remember. In

Leicester's army in the Netherlands (1585) the archers were

in a minority : in the great host raised against the Spanish

Armada the wealthier counties gave their contingents almost

entirely in men furnished with firearms; it was only in some

of the midland shires that the bowmen outnumbered the arque-

busiers. As early as Elizabeth's second year (1559) it is worth

noting that the picked trained-bands of London had all carried

firearms, though the general levy did not. Archery was dying

a natural death in the last fifteen years of the century, to the

accompaniment of a furious controversy in print between pro-

fessional soldiers, in which Sir Roger Williams was the main

advocate of the arquebus and Sir John Smyth the defender of

the old national weapon. Finally, in 1597, the Council took

the last step, by ordering the Lords-Lieutenant no longer to

accept as properly equipped any member of the county militia

who came furnished with bow and arrows alone.

The controversy of Smyth and Williams on the relative

merits of bow and arquebus is very amusing reading. Smyth

insists on the superior rapidity of discharge of the archer, who

(as he thinks) can 'loose off' about six times as fast as the man

with a gun. He thinks that the latter is bad at hitting the

mark, owing to the weight of his weapon, and liable to get

muddled with the complicated management of match, powder-

horn, bullets, wads, and ramrod. He had seen flurried

musketeers forget to insert any bullet at all, or put no wad

above the bullet, so that the latter rolled out of the muzzle

when inclined a little downward. Powder was damped in rain,

or on the other hand the soldier got his match too near his

powder-horn and blew himself up ! Altogether he would prefer

to have a hundred good archers than three hundred arque-

busiers. Williams replies that the defects above named only

DEVELOPMENT OF FIREARMS

87

apply to raw soldiers; trained men shoot fast and accurately, and

do not make the clumsy mistakes of which Smyth speaks. He

thinks that the archer is much more at the mercy of wind and

weather than the musketeer. Rain loosens his cord and un-

springs his bow; while a few days of cold or damp bivouacs so

weaken his strength that only a few men in a score will retain

their full vigour and 'shoot strong shoots.' On the other hand,

the arquebus of a tired or weak man goes off perfectly well, if

only he has, kept his powder dry. Williams is also great on

the moral effect of firearms: the smoke and fire are much more

encouraging to one's own side and terrifying to the enemy than

the silent fall of the arrow. However the merits of the con-

troversy lay, the advocate of firearms was practically victorious,

and the old national weapon was relegated to the lumber-room.

The cavalry, all through Elizabeth's reign, were gradually

shedding some of their ponderous armour. By 1600, as pointed

out in the Section on Costume, it was much lightened. Even

the tassets were not always worn: Sir Philip Sidney's mortal

wound at Zutphen is put down to the fact that he had refused

to don them on the fatal morning. In fact, the horseman's

armour was now intended to protect him from lance and sword,

but did not purport to stop a musket ball, though some still

fondly dreamed of 'pistol-proof' suits.

For military service within the kingdom Elizabeth relied on

the shire-levies, now regularly called militia. They were fre-

quently mustered for inspection of arms, and seem to have been

fairly efficient. For the suppression of the 'Rising in the

North' (1569) as many as 20,000 were embodied, and for pro-

tection against the Armada not less than 60,000 were called out

under the Lords-Lieutenant (1588). For service in Ireland and

on the Continent another method was adopted: 'colonels' were

authorized to raise 'regiments,' and if volunteers were in-

sufficient, men were 'pressed' from the shires to complete the

cadres. The custom (as those who remember the dealings of

Sir John Falstaff in Shakespeare will guess) was one which led

to abuses. Each village tried to get its local ne'er-do-weels

and loafers taken by the recruiting office, with the result that

the material of a 'pressed' regiment left much to be desired.

88

WAR AND MILITARY ARCHITECTURE

Discipline seems to have often been in the same unsatisfactory

state that we have noted in the reign of Henry VIII, and for

the same reasons. It was perhaps at its worst in the un-

fortunate 'Journey of Portugal' in 1589.

The permanently embodied regiments wore uniforms, but

there was no general dress for the whole army. We hear of

corps in blue, red, white, and 'motley or any other sad green

colour or russet.' The corps were at first very large: 2,000 or

3,000 strong, after the model of the Spanish tercios. But by

the end of the reign the more manageable number of 1,200 or

1,500 was commoner. These bodies were divided into 'com-

panies' (the earlier 'bands') from 100 to 150 strong: each was

under a captain, and carried its own flag. The infantry was

arrayed in a central mass of pikemen and halberdiers ('halberd'

has superseded the older term 'bill') , with musketeers and

caliver-men on the wings. Archers were still to be found

mixed with the 'shot' during the first thirty years of the reign.

When armies closed, the musketeers retired for cover behind

the pikemen, with whom lay the final decision of battle.

Cavalry always worked on the wings, and the 'demi-lance' with

his light armour was more common than the fully-armed

'lance.' Many horsemen had begun to use pistols, like the

German Reiters, a fact which did not add to their efficiency,

as it tended to distract their attention from the all-importance

of shock and impact in cavalry affairs.

Artillery, always growing in efficiency, was regularly used

in battle no less than in sieges. But its slowness of discharge

and its short range still prevented it from playing a decisive

part in the majority of engagements. The calibres and patterns

of gun were now very numerous and complicated, ranging from

'cannon' and 'demi-cannon' downwards, through sakers, cul-

verins, &c., to small wall-pieces, some of which were breach-

loaders of a primitive type. To meet the growth in the size

and efficiency of cannon, military architecture had been forced

to revolutionize itself. The old idea of the stronghold was

gone; the Elizabethan nobility no longer tried to make their

homes defensible, but reared splendid gabled mansions on

the largest scale. There was not much military building in

DEVELOPMENT OF FIREARMS

89

England, owing to the general peace which the realm enjoyed,

but something was done on the Scottish frontier and on points

of the coast exposed to possible attack from hostile fleets.

Henry VIII built a number of forts along the south coast,

such as Camber, Hurst and Sandown castles, and the fortifica-

tion of places like Portsmouth, Plymouth, and Berwick were

often patched and improved. The new type of military archi-

tecture did not rely on the height of walls, for that would only

give extra space on which artillery could play, but on their thick-

ness, and on broad ditches and external earthworks, which were

intended to keep the besieger far from the body of the place.

Moreover, every new fort or town-wall was built in a way

to give full opportunity for the employment of cannon, often

with platforms suitable for mounting batteries of considerable

strength. They were so placed as to command all possible lines

of approach, and to allow of no 'dead angles.' But England

suffered no serious attack from without during the whole cen-

tury, and defensive architecture was somewhat neglected in con-

sequence. The teaching of the great sieges of the Dutch War

of Independence was known to our professional soldiers, but not

much applied. The parsimonious Elizabeth was as loath to spend

money on stone and mortar as on powder and shot, and England

could show little to compare with the great fortresses of the

Continent.

BOOKS FOR REFERENCE.

Oman, A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages, 1898.

George, Battles of English History, 1895.

Morris, The Welsh Wars of Edward I, 1901.

Grose, Military Antiquities, 1801.

Sir Roger Williams, A Brief Discourse of Warre, 1590.

Sir John Smyth, Certain Discourses concerning the Formes and Effects

of diuers sorts of Weapons, 1590.

Clark, Mediaeval Military Architecture in England, 1884.

Viollet-le-Duc, Military Architecture, translated by Macdermott,

edited by Parker, 2nd edition, 1879.

— Annals of a Fortress, translated by Bucknall, 1875.

These two last books must be used with caution, as they contain

doubtful matter.

(See also the list on p. 115.)

IV

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

I. Anglo-Saxon Period.

On the departure of the Romans, about the beginning of the fifth century, the Romanized Britons were in a higher state of civilization than their conquerors, the pagan Jutes, Saxons, and Angles, who, having raided the country during the fourth century, now obtained the mastery of Kènt, and ultimately of the greater part of the island. We find from Old-English graves that straight-bladed, double- or single-edged iron swords [Pl. xliii, 6, 7] suspended from leather waist-belts, single-edged knives, and iron-headed, seven-foot spears [Pl. xliii, 1-5] were the weapons of offence of these warlike intruders, and round, wooden and hide-covered targets, with large convex iron umbos, those of defence [Pl. xliv, 1]. The two-handed axe [Pl. xliii, 10], re-introduced by the Danes, the stone hammer, the sling, and the bow and arrow [Pl. xliii, 9] were used by light-armed men of lower status. Helmets of leather, bronze, iron, or wood, with crests of boars on the ridge, protected the head, the hair of which was worn long. The mail-shirt, short-sleeved and short-skirted body armour, is depicted in illuminations as though it consisted of rings placed close together and flat upon a tunic [Pl. xliv, 2]. This is only one mode of representing inter-linked chain-mail, among many used by artists from the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries to indicate this same defence [Plates xliv-xlvi, passim]. For the armour, costume, manners and customs of the later Anglo-Saxons after their conversion there is ample and admirable evidence in their illuminated MSS. [Plates xliv, 1, 5; lxxi, 2]. Thus we gather that the royal habit consisted of a plain tunic girded round the

Plate XLIII.

1. Anglo-Saxon lozenge-shaped spear-head. (Found at Ash, near Sandwich.)

2. A.-S. leaf-shaped spear-head. (Found in the Fairford Graves, Gloucestershire.)

3. A.-S. ogre-shaped spear-head. (Found near Bredon Hill, Worcestershire.)

4. A.-S. barbed spear-head. (Found at Sibertswold Down, Kent.)

5. A.-S. four-sided spear-head. (Fairford Graves.)

6. A.-S. sword. (Fairford Graves.)

7. A.-S. sword with bronze mountings of sheath. (Found in A.-S. cemetery, Wilbraham, Cambridgeshire.)

8. Norwegian sword. (From Hewitt's Ancient Armour, 1855, I. 33.)

9. A.-S. bow, arrow, and quiver. (Cotton MS. Tib. C. vi.)

10. Norwegian axe. (From the Saxon Chronicle.)

11. A.-S. taper axe-head. (From A.-S. cemetery at Osengell.)

12. A.-S. bronze frame-helmet. (Found on skeleton at Lechlade, near Kelmscott.)

deonard Barnard, del.

NORMAN AND EARLY PLANTAGENET PERIODS 91

waist, a mantle or short cloak fastened on the right shoulder

by a fibula, the legs being clad in hose or long stockings,

drawn up over short breeches, and swathed below the knee

with bandages: this is the 'cross-gartering' still found in use

in England in the seventeenth century, and worn at the present

day by the peasants of the Appennines, and in the modified form

of the Indian puttee by British soldiers in 1901. Great ladies

wore a long gown with wide hanging sleeves, a super-tunic

reaching down to the knees and usually girded with a swathe

of cloth, a large mantle thrown over the left shoulder, and,

if married or 'religious,' the invariable coverchief or hood

[Pl. xlix, 4]. Shirts and shifts of linen, with a long gown for

women and a short, belted tunic for men, with shoes, and hat or

cap, and cloaks for bad weather, was the ordinary dress for free

persons. Slaves went poll-headed and barefoot.

The armour and costume of the Danish settlers in England

developed generally in their new country into greater splendour

than was affected by the Anglo-Saxons of the tenth century.

The new-comers were expert bowmen, and famous for their

skill in the use of the axe [Pl. xliii, 10]. Many of their

swords were made in France, and had richly ornamented hilts,

and their most prized helmets came from Poitou. They

would inscribe a favourite weapon with runes; often too they

would give a special name to sword, spear, axe, or mailcoat. As

with the Anglo-Saxons, slingers formed an important constituent

in the Danish host. The shields of the Danes were circular,

and painted with red and black and white and yellow, and even

adorned with gold.

Their civil costume, white linen, red, blue,

or natural wool-coloured cloth, and furred mantles, was similar

to that of the Anglo-Saxons, and, like them, they wore long

hair in which they took great pride.

2. Norman and Early Plantagenet Periods.

The habits of the kings of the Norman dynasty differ little

from those of earlier times, the tunic and mantle being worn

with but slight variations of shape, the wide-sleeved gown

known as the dalmatic [Pl. xliv, 6] making its appearance

92

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

in the time of Henry I ; thenceforward the regal habiliments

have remained almost unchanged until the present day, and

therefore will call for little further remark. The priceless

monument known as The Bayeux Tapestry exhibits with great

precision the armour of the end of the eleventh century

[Pl. xliv, 3, 4]. The principal bodily defence under the

Norman dynasty was the ringed tunic of interlinked mail,

then and long after called the hauberk. It was continued

over the head in the form of a hood, above which was worn

a pointed helmet with a nasal. This hauberk was the improved

successor of the war-byrnie, or battle-shirt, of later Anglo-

Saxon times. It perhaps came to us from the East, and had

its origin in remote antiquity. It is possible that some of the

varieties of representation in the Tapestry and in illuminated

MSS. indicate not mail, but quilted defences. In the twelfth

century chausses of mail began to be used. The hair of the

English was still worn very long, the Normans being distin-

guished in the stitch-work of the Tapestry by their close-shaven

faces and short hair, which makes their heads look as though

shaven high up at the back. Their shields were of the kite

shape, a form derived from the Frankish and Byzantine shield,

and in some cases were decorated with fanciful devices. The

principal weapons used on both sides at Hastings were the

broad-bladed sword, the mace, the seven-foot spear or lance ;

the English alone used the two-handed Danish axe, a weapon

that could cut off a horse's head or a man's leg at a single

blow [Plates xliii, 10; xliv, 2]. Like the Danes, the Normans

were expert bowmen, and their archery contributed largely to

the victory at Hastings [Pl. xliv, 3]. There were also men with

stone axes and slingers in the opposing hosts at that battle.

The armour and weapons of this time continued with little

change till the close of the twelfth century, when the crossbow

and quarrel appeared and remained in use until its final extinc-

tion by firearms. The trigger of the crossbow was the distant

ancestor of the elaborate mechanisms of the seventeenth-century

firelocks.

After the Conquest the costume of the nobility rapidly

increased in extravagance, with fur-lined mantles, and upper

PLATE XLIV

1. Anglo-Saxon soldier.

(Cott. MS. Tiber. c. vi.)

2. English axe-man, 1066.

(Bayeux Tapestry.)

3. Norman archer, 1066.

(Bayeux Tapestry.)

4. Norman horseman, 1066.

(Bayeux Tapestry.)

5. King Edgar. (Cott. MS. Vesp. A. viii.)

6. Effigy of Richard I.

(Fontevraulc Abbey.)

7. Effigy of King John.

(Worc. Cat.)

Leonard Barnard delt

NORMAN AND EARLY PLANTAGENET PERIODS 93

and under tunics. Sleeves, hair and beard all reached to

a great length in the time of Rufus. Peak-toed boots and

caps of the Phrygian form were worn, and the general costliness

of dress justly excited the anger of the monkish historians. The

ladies of the time wore tight gowns with very long sleeves pen-

dent from the wrists, and often tied up into knots, long trailing

skirts, and silk-broidered hair [Plates xlix, 5; lviii, 20]. The

dress of the middle classes consisted of long and short tunics,

mantles, chausses, or swathings, and short boots. The husband-

men favoured much the same garb, but of the plainest character ;

they wore flat-brimmed hats, or close-fitting round or flat skull-

caps, and often went barefoot.

. The monumental effigy at Fontevraud of Henry II and that

of his son Cœur de Lion [Pl. xliv, 6] have special value as

showing the regal costume of the time, which reached to the

feet and was brilliant in its decorations. A similar fashion

may be seen in the effigies of the queens of Henry II [Pl.

xlix, 6] and of John, interred in the same abbey church,

and of Richard I's queen, Berengaria, now in the cathedral of

Le Mans. The figure of King John at Worcester, the earliest

contemporary monymental effigy of an English monarch in this

country, is shown in the usual royal vestments, but they are

somewhat shorter, in the mode then established. Only slight

modifications in the now accepted regal habits are observable in

the effigies of Henry III, Edward II, Edward III, Richard II,

Henry IV and Henry VII.

We know from seals, sculptures, and illuminated MSS. that

the usual military harness of a gentleman in the last years of the

twelfth century consisted of a gambeson or quilted body-garment

of leather or linen, stuffed with wool, tow, or rags, and above it

a long-sleeved hauberk with its attached hood drawn over the

head and covering the mouth [cp. Pl. lx, 4]. The mail sleeves

ended in mittens with separate receptacles for the thumbs,

and a hole in the palm through which the hands could be

passed so that the mittens might hang from the wrists when

the bare hand had to be used. The hauberk was kept in place

by straps interlaced in the mail round the brows and the wrists

[cp. Pl. lx, 4], the head being further protected by a skull-cap of

. 94

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

iron worn under the hood, which usually had a flapped opening

tied or buckled up over the ear [Pl. LII, 1], and a thick woollen

coif was worn to relieve the pressure of the mail hood and cap.

Mail chausses were worn on the legs, tightened by straps below

the knees [cp. Pl. LX, 4]; the heels were furnished with prick-

spurs, and a surcoat reaching to just below the knee was con-

fined round the waist by a strap (cingulum). A long and heavy

sword was suspended from a broad transverse belt, in its turn

supported behind by an attachment to the cingulum, and

usually fastened to the scabbard in later times in a very curious

and complicated way. On the left arm the knight bore

a great heater-shaped shield, curved more or less to better

cover and protect the body, fastened to the arm by enarmes,

or leather loops, and suspended by a guige that passed over

the right shoulder [cp. Pl. LX, 4]. Occasionally the martel de

fer, a combined hammer and pick, was carried, in conjunction

with a circular targe, and was used with great efficacy for

breaking up the coats of mail and other defences, and thus

making fatal openings for sword and lance. It is noteworthy

that almost throughout the twelfth century the skirts of the

tunic, long or short, appear below the hauberk, and not above

it : the first and second seals of Cœur de Lion exhibit examples

[Pl. LIII, 12]. The latter also gives an early instance of the

cylindrical flat-topped helm, with the usual wooden or leather

fan-cresting of the period. The seal of John [Pl. LIII, 13]

shows him completely clad in mail, with a hood covering the

mouth and drawn up to a rounded iron head-piece, and with

a tunic, or, as it had now become, a surcoat, worn over the

hauberk. This important change was of widespread intro-

duction in the first years of the thirteenth century, and was

introduced, not so much to modify the heat of the sun's rays

on the mail in Eastern climes, though that was one of its

uses, as to protect the hauberk from wet and rust, to 'were hitte

fro the wete,' in damp northern regions. The twelfth-century

head-piece, at first pointed or cone-shaped, with a nasal [Pl.

XLIV, 2–4], was changed later into a flat or round-topped iron

cap, with a band below the chin, as may be seen in one of

the earliest of the effigies in the Temple church, that formerly

PLATE XLV

1. Brass of Sir John de Creke, c. 1325. (Westley Waterless, Cambridgeshire)

2. Brass of Ralph, Lord Stafford, 1347. (Elyng, Norfolk.)

3. Brass of John Cray, Esq., c. 1390. (Chilton, Oxon.)

4. Brass of Sir Geo. Felbrigge, 1400. (Playford, Suffolk.)

5. Brass of . . . D'Eresby, c. 1410. (Spilsby, Lincolnshire)

6. Brass of Sir John Lysle, c. 1420. (Thruxton, Hants.)

Leonard Barnard, del.

NORMAN AND EARLY PLANTAGENET PERIODS 95

attributed to Geoffrey de Mandeville, who died in 1144 [Pl.

LII, 2]. Finally, the flat-topped cylindrical helm, with a hinged

aventaile, made its appearance about 1250, and lasted till the

end of the century [Pl. LII, 3]. Prick-spurs [e. g. Pl. LIII, 12, 13]

were worn until the middle of the fourteenth century.

With the close of the twelfth and the opening of the

thirteenth century a new and wide field of inquiry is entered

upon, and information regarding armour and costume may

be best derived, first from the monumental effigies, to which

later on the brasses must be added: the stony texts and

brazen records which adorn English churches in such pro-

fusion, and illustrate the history of the country with a fullness

unexampled elsewhere in Europe. To these authorities are

added the Great Seals of the kings and the signets of minor

personages, and, naturally, the precise and detailed and dated

evidence of the illuminated MSS. Such will be the copious

sources of information until the time of Henry VIII, when the

pencil of Holbein and his successors place the living originals

before us.

The ring mail-coat of the twelfth century endured not only

throughout the thirteenth, but lingered for about twenty years

into the fourteenth, the first changes being the introduction

of the separate mail hood [Pl. LX, 6], of small pieces of plate

or cuir-bouilli at the knees and elbows, of slight modifications

in form and addition in length to the surcoat, and such altera-

tions in the details of the sword-belt as fashion dictated.

It may be noted that the knee, being the most exposed part

of a horseman, was the first portion of the body to receive plate.

The ailettes [Pl. LX, 6], a picturesque addition to the harness of

this period, appear to have been mere flimsy additions in cuir-

bouilli, or parchment on wire frames, for the display of heraldry.

They were painted with armorials, and the numerous examples

on continental brasses clearly show that they had no significance

whatever as items of defence. The cross-legged attitude of many

effigies of the last half of the thirteenth and the first half of the

fourteenth century was a peculiar convention of English sculp-

ture, and bore no reference whatever to the Crusades.

The general civil costume of men in the upper classes during

96

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

the thirteenth century consisted of an under-tunic with tight,

buttoned sleeves, a short upper-tunic, or gardecorps, sometimes

spoken of as a ciclaton or cyclas, gown, hood, and mantle of

rich stuff, short boots or shoes, with long toes, and gloves.

Fur was much used for linings. The hood, or a variety of it,

a white coif tied under the chin, was a constant feature of

men's dress. The costume of a youth is given in Plate XLVIII, 1.

He wears a tunic, gathered in at the waist, apparently by

a girdle ; a tippet over the shoulders, hosen, and rather high

boots. The new-fashioned clothes were now shaped to the

body, not cut by simple gore and length as before.

The costume of ladies of the upper classes during the same

period consisted of a close gown, super-tunic, and mantle of

great fullness ; and the gorget, or wimple, was generally worn

by married gentlewomen or nuns. The hair was confined in

a variety of ways by head-dresses, which usually included a caul

or net, and was covered with the veil ; the whole presenting

a 'confection' of great elegance, that is well exemplified by the

effigy in Westminster Abbey of Aveline, Countess of Lancaster

[Pl. L, I]. Of simpler form and detail, and plainer materials,

were the habits of less exalted ladies. The wimple was at first

never worn without the veil ; in the fourteenth century it is

frequently seen alone, or the head-dress is formed by pinning

up the veil on either side of the face. The lower orders of both

sexes wore tunics, or smocks, and plain gowns and mantles of

various coarse cloths, known as russet, birrus, cordetum, and

sarcilis.

With the accession of Edward I in 1272 came an abatement

in the richness of apparel, and it is probable that, save on the

day of his coronation, the great monarch was never in his

lifetime so gorgeously clothed as he was when he was placed

in his coffin. The plainness of the king's habit was naturally

followed by the courtiers, but the simple dress shown in the

conventional effigy of Queen Eleanor at Westminster by no

means illustrates that of the ladies of her time, who were much

rebuked, alike by the priest and by the satirist, for their pride

and extravagance, for their kirtles or their gowns, ' lacis moult

estreitement,' their nakéd necks and horned head-dresses.

PLATE XLVI.

1. Brass of Sir John Barnard. 1451. (Trelham, Cambs.)

2. & 3. Effigy of Rich. Beauchamp, E. of Warwick ; d. 1439. Date of armour. c. 1494. (St Mary’s, Warwick.)

3. Brass of Thos. Peyton, Esq. 1494. (Everard Barnard, esq. ) (Iselham, Cambs.)

4. Suit of fluted armour, knp. Hen. VIII. (Meyrick Collection.)

5. Brass of Humphrey Brewster, Esq. 1593. (Wrentham, Suffolk.)

NORMAN AND EARLY PLANTAGENET PERIODS

97

The most conspicuous garment of the knight in the thirteenth

and fourteenth centuries is of course the surcoat, which in later

times was usually embroidered or painted with the wearer's

arms. As has already been stated, the surcoat, at first falling

only to the knees [Pl. LX, 4], became longer in the latter years of

the thirteenth century [Pl. LXI, 1], and at the end of the century

reached such a length that men called upon suddenly to fight

on foot sometimes got their legs entangled in its ample folds,

and fell an easy prey to the enemy. The skirt was accordingly

evenly reduced all round [Pl. LX, 6], but even this amount of

drapery was found to be an inconvenience. A new and strange

garment was therefore formed by cutting away the whole of the

front of the surcoat up to the middle of the thighs, slitting it up

the sides to the hips, taking it in at the body, and lacing it on

the right side [Pl. XLV, 1]. Thus was formed the military cyclas,

which appears to have been a purely English invention. It did

not long find favour ; the useless, flapping hinder part was an

incumbrance, and it does not appear on more than twenty

monumental effigies between 1321 and 1346. As early as 1349

this tail was cut off the cyclas [Pl. XLV, 2]; next the full skirt

disappeared, and what remained of the surcoat was fitted tightly

to the body, the lower edges of the garment thus formed were

'quainted' or dagged, it was laced up at the side, and the jupon

made its appearance [Pl. XLV, 3, 4]. These six stages are

remarkable features in the gradual change of fashion in the

surcoat from long and loose to short and tight within two

hundred years.

After the death of Edward I, though regal state-robes re-

mained unaltered, extravagance reached to a great height in the

garments of his successor and of the nobility. New fopperies

were introduced from France by unworthy favourites like the

profligate Gaveston, or the Despensers, or invented by them,

and eagerly adopted by the king and the courtiers ; and although

the financial condition of the country was not consonant with

a like display among the middle and lower classes, a luxurious

fashion was now set in England which became still more

ostentatious and eccentric in the following reign. The ordinary

dress of the commonalty at this time is shown in Plate XLVIII, 2.

BARNAKD

11

98

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

The costume of the ladies of the time of Edward II underwent no particular change: the wimple continued, but many varieties of head-dress were introduced [e. g. Pl. L, 2]. It is during this reign that we see the rise of a special habit for legal dignitaries, the semi-clerical character of which betrays its origin: the lawyer was ceasing to be necessarily a churchman.

The military costume of the fourteenth century is, in point of artistic grace, more attractive to the student of armour than that of any other period. The growing desire for more splendid and less cumbrous defences led to the employment of several varieties of lighter armour, among which were the peculiar armour known as 'banded' [Pl. xlv, 1], the construction of which has baffled antiquaries, pourpoint, studded or bezanted defence [Pl. liii, 11], jazerine, scales, and cuir-bouilli. The use of these protections, combined with plate, brought about in the course of a hundred years the gradual extinction of mail, save as an auxiliary to plate, and produced a wonderful and interesting variety in armour. Of these fascinating panoplies, unfortunately only a score of helms and helmets and a few isolated pieces of plate have survived to our day: a coute, a poleyn, a cuff of a gauntlet, perchance a fragment of jazerine or a portion of a camail. The brass [Pl. xlv, 1] of Sir John de Creke (c. 1325) shows him in a quilted gambeson, over which is a short-sleeved hauberk of banded mail, with the upper arm strengthened by half-plates or demi-brassarts; over the mail in succession are a habergeon of some stuff, with a scalloped edge, a haketon of either pourpoint or studded defence, and a cyclas. Over the mail hood, which is apparently, as in the old style, continuous with the hauberk, a fluted bascinet, with an ornamental coronal or prente, is worn. The fore-arm is further protected by vambraces or avant-bras, and lion-faced discs and coutes defend the shoulders and elbows respectively. He has mail chausses, reinforced with demi-jambs; while genouillères or poleyns defend the knees, and demi-sollerets the outer sides of the feet. A small shield is borne on the left arm, and the rowelled spurs were becoming established. This is an elaborate and highly curious military costume of many items, and it well exemplifies the rapidity with which the time-honoured panoply of the thirteenth

PLATE XLVII.

1. Effigy of Sir James de St. Hilaire. 1341. From W.H. St. John Hope.

2. English archer, 15th cent. Cotton MS. Julius E. iv.

3. Cross-bow man, 15th cent. Cotton MS. Julius. E. iv.

4. Hand-gun man, 15th cent. (Bod'y MS. 264, fol 127.)

Leonard Bamard del.

5. English archer, 1544 (Contemporary print of drawing. Hen. VIII. dection). From Catus.

6. English halberdier, 1544. Ibid.

NORMAN AND EARLY PLANTAGENET PERIODS

99

century gave way before the exigencies of extravagant fashion

and the advancing requirements of military men. No doubt

the man also wore beneath the four body-garments at least

the leather curie, the cuera of the Spaniards, to keep off the

pressure of the plate. In their hurry for change the knights

rushed from one extreme to another. The sword-belts, the

changes and details of which throughout the Middle Ages are

alone sufficient to form a volume of much artistic interest,

were now in a similar state of transition ; they were generally

attached to the scabbards by metal lockets. The beautiful ala-

baster effigy of John of Eltham (1334), in Westminster Abbey,

exhibits him in armour much more advanced than that of De

Creke. He wears the hauberk, haketon, and cyclas, but no

gambeson or habergeon, and has old-fashioned prick-spurs.

His bascinet is fitted with its camail, and the transverse

sword-belt has progressed in style. A few years later the

misericorde [Pl. xlv, 3] was introduced, and from this time

forward it is never lost sight of as an essential weapon of

a knight. This was a long, narrow-bladed dagger, used to

slip between or under the plates of armour, or through

the ocularia (vizor-holes). The effigy of Sir John de Lyons

(1346) at Warkworth, in Northamptonshire, shows slight

further changes ; the gambeson, a sleeved haketon, and a cyclas

are worn. It is at this time that the cyclas vanishes, as

explained above, by the simple process of cutting the back

skirt level with the front. The skirted jupon thus formed is

well illustrated in the small figures of Lord Stafford [Pl. xlv, 2]

and Lord Hastings on the brass of Sir Hugh de Hastings

(1347) at Elsing, in Norfolk. From this tight-fitting and short-

skirted transitional body-garment to the jupon proper was but

a step ; and no doubt all the three docked forms of the surcoat,

the cyclas, the tailless cyclas (or skirted jupon), and the jupon,

were worn on the glorious field of Cressy in 1346. The shield,

carried by knights from time immemorial and displayed on

their recumbent effigies, ceased to appear soon after the middle

of the century, and occurs last in the brass of William de

Aldeburgh (c. 1360). The jupon, which had its origin in civil

dress, is first seen as a military garment about 1340, over-

H 2

100

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

lapping, in the usual way, for a few years the disappearing

cyclas and skirted jupon. Specially associated with it is the

baudric or horizontal belt worn across the hips [Pl. xlv, 3].

This was no longer sustained at the back by the ancient

subsidiary cingulum or waist-belt, which now passes away with

the longer surcoats it girded, but apparently was looped up

with hooks at the back or sewn to the jupon. As a civil belt

it was in being as early as 1335, the anelace, a heavy, broad-

bladed, sharp-pointed, double-edged knife, about two feet long

in all, that appears frequently in the brasses of civilians, being

slung from it; in its military capacity it supported the sword,

which was fastened close up to it, and the misericorde. The change

was not popular, and the transverse belts well held their ground

until the middle of the century, when the girdler's art reached

its culminating point. Like the surcoat and the cyclas, the

jupon had its slight accidents of shape, finally taking the typical

form well shown by the latten effigy (1376) of the Black Prince

at Canterbury, and by hundreds of routine alabaster and stone

effigies and brasses of the last quarter of the fourteenth and

the first quarter of the fifteenth century throughout the kingdom

[Pl. xlv, 3]. During this half-century the knightly equipment

consisted of a pointed bascinet with an attached camail;

articulated plates on the shoulders; arrière-bras and avant-bras

(or rerebraces and vambraces) of plate, for the upper and lower

arms respectively; and cuffed gauntlets, with gadlings on the

knuckles; while cuisses, jambs, and articulated sollerets, all of

plate, protected the legs and feet, which were furnished with

rowelled spurs. The body was clad in a mail hauberk, of

which a small portion appeared below the quainted edge of

the jupon, the latter often being embellished with the arms

of the wearer on back and front. The emblazoned jupon

was in fact the forerunner of the military tabard. Over all

was clasped the elaborate baudric, with its manifold variety of

decorations, sustaining the sword and misericorde. This was

a beautiful and graceful equipment, but the delicacy of the

details are only to be realized by a close study of effigies

and illuminated MSS. [Pl. xlv, 3, 4]. During the fourteenth

century the helm [Pl. lii, 4] was worn in battle and tourney

PLATE XLVIII.

1. Civil Costume, c. 1200. (Sloane MSS. 1975.)

2. Civil Costume, temp. Ed. II. (Royal MS. 14 E. 3.)

3. Effigy of Wm. of Hatfield, second son of Ed. II. (York Minster.)

4. Knight in Civil Costume, temp. Rich. II. (Harl. Collechon, 1310.)

5. Gentleman in Civil Costume, early 15th cent. (Royal MS. 15 D. 3.)

6. Richard III when Duke of Glou- cester. (Royal MS. 15 E. 4.)

Leonard Barnard del.

NORMAN AND EARLY PLANTAGENET PERIODS

over the Assyrian-like bascinet and camail, when the latter

head-piece was not furnished with a vizor. It is clear from

the moderate arch of its bottom curve, and from seals and

illuminations, that this fourteenth-century helm did not rest on

the shoulders, as did later fifteenth-century helms, but was

probably wadded inside so that it might fit closely to the bascinet.

It was secured to the front of the cuirass by a chain, and may

have been also fastened to the back of the cuirass by a strap.

Bascinets with a beak-shaped vizor appeared in the last quarter

of the century, and some half-dozen actual examples have been

preserved [Pl. lii, 5].

The extravagance in the civil costume of the nobility, that

originated, as we have seen, in the court of Edward II,

rapidly increased and spread during the reign of Edward III

[Pl. xlviii, 3]. The long gowns, plain hoods, and tunics of

male attire now gave place to the short, tight-fitting, often

richly embroidered cote, buttoned down the front, with sleeves

also closely buttoned from the elbow to the wrist, and garnished

with long pendent slips, called tippets, that hung from the

shoulder. The 'gay cote graceless' was girt round the waist by

the baudric, from which the anelace and gypcière were suspended.

A mantle, forming a cape on the breast, was thrown back over

the left shoulder, and hung in long folds behind, all the edges

being slittered or dagged. In the absence of the mantle, a hood,

or capuchon, of which there were many shapes, was in use : it

was often buttoned close up to the chin in front, and had a long

liripipe or streamer hanging behind. Hosen were worn, and

short, sharp-pointed boots or shoes, elegantly diapered with

Gothic patterns. In this, as in other reigns, sumptuary laws

were passed with the object of regulating luxury in dress

according to the rank or wealth of the wearer, but then, as

always, were treated with absolute disregard. During Ed-

ward's long reign the cost'me of the ladies also underwent

great change. Their gar .nts were always of great rich-

ness, and one variety blended with another to such an extent

that it is not easy to disentangle them. Long tight-sleeved

gowns appear, often embroidered with armorial bearings, and

having long pendent streamers hanging from the upper arm,

102

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

as in the dress of men. We find also shorter kirtles, the

tight sleeves of which were extended so as to cover the backs

of the hands, combined with a close upper tunic. Another

notable and later costume was composed of the kirtle with

its girdle, the sideless garment known as the cote-hardi, and

the mantle fastened with cords, habits that endured for nearly

two hundred years [Plates L, 3, 5 ; LXI, 2]. The head-dresses

were of great variety, the main characteristic being that the

hair was braided and somewhat closely dressed with kerchiefs

and frets of gold network. The ancient wimple was gradually

passing away, and, after 1377, in harmony with the fopperies

of Richard II's time, various extravagant kinds of head-gear

appeared. The male dress of the lower orders consisted of

short tunics, hoods, and hosen, the female dress of kirtles and

upper tunics. Mourning habits in the form of long black

mantles were introduced early in the reign of Edward III.

Luxury and extravagance in dress reached a climax during

the reign of Richard II : the example set by the king and the

court was imitated by all classes to such an extent that con-

temporary writers declared that it was impossible to distinguish

rank from rank or rich from poor. The rhyming literature of

the period may now be added to the evidence of the monu-

ments and the MSS., and the pages of Chaucer vividly describe

the dresses of all classes. The king of course outshone the

courtiers in his coats embroidered with precious stones and

various devices. His portrait in Westminster Abbey shows him

in a robe decorated with his initial and roses, and in the Wilton

House diptych his mantle is embroidered all over with his

badge of the White Hart [Pl. LXXXII].

In military equipment there was a steady continuance of the

change which, starting from the accession of Edward II in

1327, had settled into the camail and bascinet type as shown

in the effigy of the Black Prince [cp. Pl. xlv, 1-4]. A loose

jupon, introduced from Burgundy, was frequently worn, but

does not appear in monumental effigies. It is here to be noted

that in the literature of the day, old terms for defences of mail

were frequently used in speaking of portions of armour of plate or

of cuir-bouilli (then much employed), and that fashions in armour

PLATE XLIX.

1. Civil Costume, temp. Hen. VIII.

(Harl. MS. 1299.)

2. Portrait of Thomas, Lord Surry, be Head

tomb of Suckles, in the Abbey at

Westminster.

(Hampton Court.)

3. Portrait of Lord Russell of

Thornhaugh, temp. Eliz. at

Woburn Abbey.

4. Anglo-Saxon lady. From a

Benedictional of St. Ethelwold.

5. Henry VIII. Princess.

(MS. V. 1.)

6. Effigy of Eleanor, Q. of Hen. III.

(Westminster Abbey.)

Leonard Burnard. fecit

NORMAN AND EARLY PLANTAGENET PERIODS 103

constantly overlapped. This was still more so in civil costume,

and causes in both cases a continual difficulty in presenting an

absolutely consecutive picture.

It is clearly to be gathered that the nobility and upper classes

continued to wear the short jupon, often party-coloured, with

narrow waist-belt and tight sleeves, as well as the new-fashioned

looser body-garment with full-hanging, slittered sleeves, one

variety of which had skirts reaching to the ground. Beneath

these was the under-tunic, with its long tight sleeves and cuffs

spreading over the backs of the hands. The hosen were not

in pairs, but party-coloured like the jupons, and at one time

the long toes of fashionable shoes were fastened to the knees

by light chains. Over all men of rank wore in full dress a great

full-sleeved gown, trailing on the ground, with a high collar

fitting tight under the chin and covering the ears [Pl. xlviii, 4].

In fact, from the back view it was not easy to distinguish a man

thus clad from a woman. Every edge of this garment was deeply

slittered or cut into fantastic shapes, called 'cut-work.' Hoods

were worn on horseback, and 'cut-work,' close, or loose caps,

turned up all round and ornamented with a single feather in front

[Pl. li, 7]. The most characteristic caps of this time were those

supposed to have been formed out of the hood whose back-piece

was bound round the head, with a broad piece gathered into the

top, the full neck-piece being divided into strips in fan-fashion,

with the edges slittered or jagged, such divided pieces either

falling about in any direction, or carefully laid together on one

side, while the long liripipe hung from the band and reached

almost to the ground. This queer and characteristic head-gear

is very typical of the period, and long found favour [Pl. li, 9].

Similar forms of this costume were in use by all classes, the

long pokes, or bag-pipe shaped sleeves, and short jupons being

the distinguishing peculiarities of the time. The dress of the

women of the upper classes was no less splendid and fantastic.

It comprised the kirtle, with its narrow girdle for the gypcière,

the plain or fur-faced cote-hardi, and the mantle embroidered

with heraldry, mottoes, or devices. The gathering of the hair

into enriched cauls, over which was worn a chalet, a coronet,

or a veil, was the precursor of the more splendid tiring of

104

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

like character that appears in the early years of the fifteenth

century. The delightful descriptions in Chaucer's Rhyme of

Sir Topas and Canterbury Tales, and in Langland's Piers

Plowman's Visions, of the costume of various classes leave

nothing to be added to the present attempt.

3. York and Lancaster Period.

Soon after the establishment of the House of Lancaster, in

the person of Henry IV, in 1399, attention was again directed

to extravagance in attire by the re-enaction of the sumptuary

edicts of earlier times, but again to little purpose. Judging

from the effigy of the king at Canterbury, his own royal dress

well accorded with the richness of the general fashion in civil

garb. With regard to armour, the gradual swallowing up of

mail by plate continued, and within ten years of the beginning

of the fifteenth century the camail had been reinforced by

a high gorget of plate [Pl. xlv, 5], of the same form as the

old mail protection, of which latter a few links at first appeared

below the edge of the new steel defence. Extended articulated

shoulder-pieces [Pl. xlv, 5], often with distinct pallets [Pl. xlv, 6],

now defend the vif de l'auberc– known in later times as the

défaut de la cuirasse–at the armpits, and mail appears only

below the taces or tassets which, with the breastplate and

back-piece, a true 'pair of plates,' have taken the place of the

jupon, and now protect the body. The taces were overlapping

hip-bands, generally hinged on the left side and buckled on

the right. They overlapped either upwards [Pl. xlvi, 2, 3] or

downwards [Pl. xlv, 5]. The horizontal baudric is now clean

gone, and a narrow transverse belt sustains the sword and

misericorde [Pl. xlv, 6]. A few years later the tassets have in-

creased in number, and mail is no longer visible. The man is

now 'locked up in steel,' and the change from mail to plate in

a hundred years has been complete and remarkable. During the

reign of Henry V the decorated orle or wreath for diminishing

the pressure of the helm is to be observed round the bassinets

[Pl. lii, 6], and small tuilles begin to appear, hung in front

from the lowest tasset [Pl. liii, 8]. These were the forerunners

PLATE I.

1. Effigy of Aveline, Countess of Lanc.,

d. 1274. Westminster Abbey.

2. Brass of Lady Northwode, c. 1330

(Minster, Isle of Sheppey)

3. Effigy of Blanche or 'la Tour' daughter

of Ed. III., d. 1340. Westminster Abbey.

4. Brass of lady of Clopton family,

c. 1445. (Long Melford, Suffolk.)

5. Brass of Lady Curson, 1471

(Heigham, Norfolk.)

6. Female costume, temp. Hen. VII.

Harl. MS., 4425.

Leonard Barnard, del.

YORK AND LANCASTER PERIOD

105

of the larger tuilles [Pl. xlvi, 1-4] which were well established,

together with the cuirasse à emboîtement, when Henry VI had

been twenty years on the throne. The larger hanging tuilles took

the place of the lowest hoop of the tassets, and by falling closer

to the thigh prevented a weapon from getting under the tassets.

The cuirasse à emboîtement was formed of two portions, which

respectively covered the chest and the midriff; the lower half,

known as the demi-placcate, overlapped the upper, and was

connected with it by a strap or a sliding rivet, so that the

body could be bent with comparative ease. The gilt latten

effigy at Warwick of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick,

who died in 1439 [Pl. xlvi, 2, 3], with its reinforced shoulder

guards-it was the period par excellence of reinforcements-

and great left elbow-piece is an admirable illustration. The

bascinets of this time, which gradually approached in form

to the close armets [Pl. lii, 10], and in a less degree to

the salades [Pl. lii, 11] or open helmets of the middle of

the century, rarely had vizors; and the earlier ones were

decorated at the apex by a single feather stuck in a tube.

The form of the helms, with their panaches or pennaches [Pl.

lii, 8], crests, wreaths, and mantlings [Pl. lii, 7], is well ascer-

tained from those shown beneath the heads of effigies and

brasses. Later fifteenth-century helms were deeply curved

at the bottom, so as to fit closely down to the shoulders, and

were firmly fixed to both chest and back [Pl. liii, A]. For

knights, archers, and other soldiers alike jazerine continued

in use for lighter adjuncts of armour, as also did brigandine,

which was its reverse in construction, having the metal

splints inside instead of outside the material. In the latter

part of the century the quilted jack appeared, often stuffed

with mail. This was the legitimate ancestor of the Elizabethan

jack with steel plates sewn into it: the 'stiel cotte' of the

Musters of Armada times. An interesting point in the con-

sideration of armour is the accuracy with which the smallest

details of the actual remains, naturally increasing in number

as we come later, are corroborated by historical evidence and

faithful monuments in village churches. It is evident that

tilting armour began to be differentiated from hosting array

106

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

soon after the beginning of the fifteenth century. During the

reign of Edward IV the high plate gorget [Pl. xLv, 5] gave way

to the moderate standard of mail [Plates xlvi, 1 ; LIII, 6] or

of plate [Pl. LII, 9], and the vizored salade, with its mentonniere,

or more properly bavier [Pl. LII, 11] came in. The Yorkist

Collar of Suns and Roses, with the pendent badges of the differ-

ent royal houses such as York, March, and later Beaufort and

Tudor, now appeared beside the official Lancastrian Collar of

SS. [Pl. xlvi, 1], which had its unknown origin when Henry

of Lancaster was a boy. Again pressing forward, we shortly

meet with representations of an oft-quoted garment, the tabard

[Pl. LX, 5] (already spoken of as a descendant of the military

jupon), with its fourfold picture of arms on front, back, and

flap-sleeves. It first appeared late in the reign of Henry V,

the sleeves or wings being then mere 'flappers,' but is rarely

seen in monuments before the end of the fifteenth century. The

standards of mail [Plates xlvi, 1 ; LIII, 6], globular breast-

plates [Pl. xlvi, 1–3], great channelled shoulder-guards [Plates

xlvi, 4 ; LIII, 6], and reinforcing pieces [Pl. xlvi, 1, 4], upright

neck-guards [Pl. LIII, 7], very large elbow-pieces [Pl. xlvi, 1, 4],

long pointed tuilles and sollerets [Pl. xlvi, 4], vizored armets,

salades with baviers fixed to the breastplate [Pl. LII, 10],

long-necked spurs, and ponderous swords hung directly in

front [Pl. xlvi, 4], are characteristic features of armour of the

middle and latter part of the century.

Almost concurrent with the rise and course of the change from

mail to plate was the origin and gradually increasing employment

of gunpowder, the explosive itself, and its manner of use, deriving

indirectly from the Greek Fire of the twelfth and thirteenth cen-

turies; and the later heavy plate was perhaps designed not only for

the tournament, but also as a protection against 'the new-fangled

bullets' rather than against pikes, bills, or arrows. The first re-

corded mention of cannon is in 1326, and the use both of powder

and of cannons is well established by documentary evidence of the

second quarter of the fourteenth century (see p. 72). Side by side,

therefore, with the increase of plate, arose cannon which cast

quarrels and stone balls, and at the end of the fifteenth century the

PLATE LI.

1. Brass of Matilda Grene, widow, 1462.

(Green's Norton, Northants.)

2 a. e. Front effigy of Lady de Thorpe,

c. 1440. (Ashwellthorpe, Norfolk.)

3. Brass of Ann Rede, 1577.

(St. Margaret's, Norwich.)

4. Horned head-dress, 15th cent.

(Royal MS. 15, E. 47.)

5. Heart-shaped head-dress, 15th cent.

(Faussett, Horl. MS. 410, fo. 80.)

6. Turban head-dress, 15th cent.

(Harl. MS., 2278.)

7. Hat of nobleman, 14th cent.

(Add. MS., 14,228.)

8. Steeple cap, 15th cent.

(Faussett, Horl. MS. 410, fo. 81.)

9. Hat of gentleman, 14th cent.

(Royal MS. 15, D. 1.)

YORK AND LANCASTER PERIOD

107

hand-guns [Pl.xlvii,4] began, little by little, to win the upper hand

and break up the magnificent suits of steel which the armourers had

conceived with so much skill. The new weapons slowly changed

the art of war, and eventually, after the lapse of two hundred

years, caused armour to be entirely abandoned save as a glister-

ing item of parade. In the meantime the heavy suits, unaffected

by the new artillery, for they were now designed for tilting,

not for warfare, reached their climax of perfection, the armourers

being encouraged in their efforts during the early years of

the sixteenth century by the friendly rivalry of three chivalrous

and sumptuous monarchs, Henry VIII, Maximilian, and

Francis I. Heavy armour, in its turn, then gradually declined.

Returning to civil dress from the beginning of the fifteenth

century, many changes took place during the hundred years

now to be touched upon. In spite of sumptuary edicts regu-

lating the length of gowns and sleeves, and the quantities of

material to be used, the habits of men in the upper classes

abated but little in their excess. Sweeping fur-trimmed gowns,

with long hanging sleeves, and capacious tippets with super-

abundance of cloth, and the peculiar slittered caps, continued

in vogue. Baudrics of bells, worn transversely from the shoulder

to the knee [Pl. xlviii, 5], and gay girdles are notable items of

festival apparel in the time of Henry IV and Henry V. The

reign of Henry VI brought with it a mixed costume, in which were

included very short tight jackets, pleated down the back, and

girded round the waist, where the dagger hung in front, and

having sleeves very full at the shoulders [Pl. xlviii, 6]. We

find also a long low-necked gown, with full hanging sleeves;

tight hosen ; square-toed shoes, or very long sharp-toed boots

and shoes [Pl. xlviii, 6]. The head-gear comprised the abacot

with its feather in front, small close caps with short pendent

bands, tasselled or fringed, and with a feather behind ; and

steeple-shaped or sugar-loaf felt hats, with brims flat, or turned

up in various ways, and upright side-feathers. Towards the end

of the century a simpler style of male attire began to be affected,

and the short gowns and sober apparel of the middle classes in

the reign of Henry VII had their origin in the last years of

Edward IV. The wardrobe accounts of Richard III indicate

108

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

how great a love of fine clothing pervaded the mind of this restless and ambitious spirit.

With regard to the habits of women during the fifteenth century, the kirtle with its girdle, the cote-hardi, and the long mantle or surcoat fastened with cords across the chest-la surcole overte-continued in favour [Pl. L, 5], the latter lasting indeed until far into the sixteenth century. But in the time of

Henry VI full gowns with long and capacious sleeves, and open turned-over collars, sometimes showing the square-cut under-vest, with very short, tightly girded waists, came into fashion [Pl. L, 4]. With the former costume the extravagant head-dresses continued. The hair was arranged in cauls to a great width on either side of the face, and surmounted by a coronet, or a chaplet, with precisely the same details as the military orles ; over this a veil was cast, but hung down behind only, like a curtain [Pl. Ll, 2]. Another head-gear consisted of a light arrangement formed by a kerchief, often of transparent material, disposed so as to resemble a pair of square wings, supported apparently on a wire foundation [Plates L, 5 ; Ll, 1]. This was the delicate 'butterfly head-dress,' which became fashionable about 1470 and prevailed for some twenty years. In other varieties of this time the tiring has less projection at the sides, but is elevated in the form of two thick horns [Pl. Ll, 4]. In the reign of Henry VI these forked coiffures became yet higher. Some took a heart-shape [Pl. Ll, 5], and full turbans of Italian fashion were also in use, the hair in some cases flowing through them and hanging down the back [Pl. Ll, 6].

The last-named head-dresses, and others, were worn with the short-waisted gowns which continued long after the middle of the fifteenth century. In the reign of Edward IV gowns were confined at the waist with broad bands, and gold chains were worn round the neck ; the tall steeple cap [Pl. Ll, 8] with long gauze veil flowing almost to the ground came in, and lasted with slight variations until the death of Edward IV - a graceful and picturesque costume. The steeple cap, with modifications, survives in the holiday attire of some of the Norman peasantry.

With the middle and lower orders hoods or kerchiefs were worn in the place of the dainty eccentricities of the upper

Plate LII.

1. From effigy of Wm. Marshal, E. of Pemb.; d. 1231. (Temple Ch.)

2. From an effigy in the Temple Ch.

3. Flat-topped cylindrical helm, with movable ventail, c. 1250. (In the Tower.)

4. Tilting helm of Sir Rich. Pem- bridge ; d.1375. (Exhib. Archaeol. Institute, 1886.)

5. Bassinet with pointed vizor, c. 1400. (Exhib. Arch. Inst., 1880.)

6. From effigy of Sir Robt. Goushill, c. 1425. (Hever- ingham, Notts.)

7. From brass of Sir Nich. Dagworth, 1401. ( Blickling, Norfolk.)

8. From brass of Lord Ferrers of Chartley, c. 1412. (Merevale, Warwickshire.)

9. From brass of Roger El- bridge, Esq., c. 1435. (Bod- dington, Suffolk.)

10. Armet, c. 1450-80. (Exhib. Arch. Inst. 1880.)

11. Sallet & Bavier, c. 1490–90. (Exhib. Arch. Inst. 1880.)

12. Fluted close-helmet, c. 1510 as (Museum of Artillery, Woolwich.)

Leonard B.arnard. delt

classes. During the reign of Henry VII moderation in apparel, so

long absent, is again discernible, but the extravagance still dis-

played at the funerals of the nobility and gentry led to the pro-

mulgation of his edict regulating expenditure on mourning. At

the close of the fifteenth century the ancient wimple was re-

introduced for aged gentlewomen, who often ended their lives

in convents, where it was worn.

4. Tudor Period.

The military equipment of the last years of the fifteenth and

the first of the sixteenth century had not quite the refinement of

its immediate forerunner, yet it would be difficult to criticize

adversely the magnificent fluted suits of the time. The tuilles

are now shorter, and mail reappears, after the absence of a

century, in the form of a skirt worn under the tuilles [Pl. xlvi, 5].

Apart from the beauty of the fluted breastplates, the flexible

gauntlets, and other pieces, attention must be called to the

workmanship of the close-helmets, with their plain, cable, or

serrated combs, and complicated so-called bellows-vizors—real

masterpieces of the pure working of iron with hammer and anvil

which have never been surpassed [Pl. lii, 12]. Doubtless the

glory of armour of this period centres in the tilting suits, of

which such magnificent examples are preserved at Vienna.

Very fine suits however, together with specimens of the joust-

ing lance, may be seen in the Tower; some of them the actual

equipment of Henry VIII. The adaptation of armour to the

fashion of the puffed suits of this period marks the special

degringolade of the ancient art, though some forms of armour had

already, centuries before, followed those of civil dress. Military

costume of every grade is well shown in the pictures at Hampton

Court illustrating the Field of the Cloth of Gold and the events

connected with that prodigal display. Important characteristics

of the armour of Henry VIII's time are the salient lamboys,

fluted steel skirts or bases, suspended from the waist, with some-

times a semicircular space left in front and behind for wear on

horseback [Pl. liii, 9]. These partially took the place of the

tuilles, but were used only to a limited extent. Their place, as

110

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

well as that of the tuilles, was taken by the series of overlapping

plates, playing freely on rivets one over the other, and known

as almayne rivets [Pl. LIII, 10]. The pike was introduced into

England during this reign, and the disuse of armour in warfare

was now steadily progressing throughout Europe, the general

tendency being for plate armour not to extend below the knees,

save in the suits for the tournament. The halberdiers wore

full-feathered flat hats and corslets, and guarded the colours,

while, after the enemy had been broken by archery, 'shot,'

cavalry, or pikes, the black-billmen, with their murderous

weapons, did 'the slaughter or execution of the battle.' The

Elizabethan breastplate par excellence took the form of the

peascod doublet of civil dress, with its tapul, or ridge down the

centre [Pl. XLVI, 6; XLIX, 3]. The old vizored salades have

quite passed away, as have also in their turn the fluted close-

helmets, with the bellows-vizors of Henry VIII's time. The

close-helmets that gradually succeed exhibit the comb which

becomes such a conspicuous feature in the burgonet with its

buffe or chin-piece [Pl. LIII, 1], and other head-pieces with

their cinque cento decorations [Pl. LIII, 2, 3], just after the

middle of the sixteenth century. The high-combed morions

[Pl. LIII, 2] were worn by pikemen, and the peaked and spiked

morions or cabassets [Pl. LIII, 3] by musketeers, because the forma-

tion of the brims of the latter did not impede the sight. Those

worn by officers were often of elaborate repoussé work, and

engraved with Renaissance details. Such were the head-pieces

specially associated, as many a picture shows, with the 'spacious

times of great Elizabeth.' Morions of both kinds for common

soldiers were made either plain or with large repoussé fleurs-de-lis

of German and Italian fashion on the sides. With the combed

armets or close-helmets of this period must be mentioned the

powerful and beautiful suits of tilting armour, of the style

shown in Jacob Topf's book, made for Leicester, Hatton, Sir

Henry Lee, and other royal favourites. Reflexions of such suits

of harness, armure de parade, are to be seen on monumental

effigies of the time [Pl. XLVI, 6], and modifications of these

are fully illustrated there down to the time of the Great Civil

War [Pl. XLVII, 1]. Carabines, petronels, arquebuses, corslets

PLATE LIII.

1. Burgonet with Buff, c. 1515-30.

(Exhib. Archæol. Inst., 1860.)

2. Morion, temp. Elizabeth.

(Exhib. Archæol. Inst., 1880.)

3. Cabasset, temp. Elizabeth.

(Exhib. Archæol. Inst., 1880.)

4. Pot-helmet, temp. Civ il War. (Meyrick Collection)

5. Lobster-tailed Burgonet, temp. Gt. Civil War. (Exhib. Archæol. Inst., 1880.)

6. From brass of Rich. Quatrem. c. 1400. (Thaum. Oxon.)

7. From brass of John Dygaven, c. 1490. (Owen. Cath.)

8. From brass of Roger Elbbrugge. c. 1435. (Ridlington, Suff.)

9. Lamboys, temp. Hen. VIII. (In the Tower.)

10. Almain Rivets, profile, front. A back, 16th cent. (In the Tower.)

11. From brass of Sir Miles Stapleton, 1304. (Formerly at Ingham, Norfolk.)

12. From second Gt. Seal of Rich. I.

13. From Gt. Seal of John

TUDOR PERIOD

111

(i. e. breast- and back-plates), and bandoliers belong to this

period; while the sleeveless and waistless buff jerkin, after-

wards the famous buff coat of the Civil War, came into general

use for pikemen, arquebusiers, musketeers (whose longer,

heavier weapon was superseding the arquebus), and targiters,

named were light infantry of the Spanish type, carrying only

a sword and target, and without armour. Their targets being

shot-proof, they received the enemy's fire, and before he could

reload attacked at close quarters, getting also if possible inside

the guard of the pikemen.

As to the civil habits during the Tudor period, there need be

the less compunction in compressing a great deal into a small

space, because we have now come into the light of day, and,

as has already been intimated, the living works of immortal

painters have placed the originals before us with the perfection

of art. The reproductions of the portraits of kings and queens,

noble men and fair dames of the sixteenth century, have made

their costumes almost as familiar to us as our own. Who is not

well acquainted, for instance, with the appearance of Henry VII

in his simple furred gown and square cap, as shown in his

painted portraits, as well as in his bronze effigy in the Abbey ;

and with that of his comely queen, wearing the familiar pedi-

mental head-dress [Pl. LX, 2]. Equally well known is the trucu-

lent personality of Henry VIII, standing wide, with his short

hair, flat cap, black and gold embroidered shirt, puffed and

slashed velvet, silk, or satin hose-stocks, coloured cloth hose-

stocks and hose being now separated for the first time—and

slashed broad-toed shoes, his burly body habited in embroidered

crimson doublet with full sleeves, and velvet jerkin, heavy with

gold and small lace, full of cut-work, and with or without sleeves

attached by points or by buttons. When to this dress is added

the frooke of cloth of gold or silver, or one of the numerous

varieties of gowns, the gorgeous figure is sufficiently complete ;

and so many portraits remain of the king that a great part of his

wardrobe is quite familiar to us. The genius of Holbein has

similarly made us acquainted with the costume of the king's six

wives, and that of Edward VI, both in painted pictures and

112

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

in the priceless drawings in the Royal collection at Windsor,

known as 'Holbein's Heads.' Queen Mary in her beautiful

embroidered gown, jewelled petticoat, small hood, ruff, and

pomander is well shown by De Heere's fine portrait in the posses-

sion of the Society of Antiquaries ; and as to Queen Elizabeth,

in her great ruff, vast fardingale, the prototype of the crinoline,

deep piqued and jewelled stomacher and ropes of pearls, what

need to dwell on a costume that has been depicted a thousand

times. We know from these sources that the queen's wardrobe

was enormous and fantastic. But without such faithful evidence

one might have been slow to believe that, even in that age of far-

fetched conceits, any one would have worn, for instance, a dress

embroidered all over with representations of human eyes and ears.

The habits of the nobility and upper classes in the time of

Henry VII had little of the simplicity affected by the king,

though the garments were much the same [Pl. xlix, 1], consist-

ing of shirt, breche, petticote, doublet, long cote, stomacher,

hosen, socks, and shoes. With this went a square cap, or,

later, a very wide-brimmed hat, with drooping party-coloured

plumes, worn on one side over a gold coif or caul that confined

the long flowing hair. Sometimes we see the hat slung at the

back. A specimen of female costume at this time is given in

Plate l, 6. With the middle classes, the sober male apparel,

originating as already mentioned in the last years of Edward IV,

continued during the reign of Henry VII, when it comprised

a plain coat, pleated down the front, a waist-belt for dagger and

purse, hosen and shoes, a close hat with a gold band, and,

pendent from it, a long tippet.

The costume of the nobles and upper classes in Henry VIII's

time followed that of the king in both form and richness, and has

bein, or Streetes, at Hampton Court of the Earl of Surrey [Pl.

xlix, 2] is an excellent example, and shows him arrayed in scarlet

of different depths. He wears a flat cap from which droops a

single feather, white shirt, pinched and laced and embroidered

with black, a short doublet open in front, a full jerkin with very

wide puffed and slashed sleeves, full hose-stocks, and hose and

small banded and jewelled shoes. Sleeves, both for men and

PLATE LIII.

TILTING HELM.

LATE FIFTEENTH CENTURY.

(In the possession of Mr. W. R. Hearn.)

TUDOR PERIOD

113

for women, were now separate articles of dress, and were of different colours and materials from the rest of the body-clothing ; they were trussed at the shoulders by points. The waistcoat is first mentioned at the end of this reign : it was sleeved, and worn under the doublet. The ancient hood is now quite gone, and the flat hats were cut and slashed, and edged or laden with feathers as worn on the close-helmets of the time. Men of the middle classes wore plain doublets, low, narrow-brimmed hats, puffed stocks, and hose. In the time of Edward VI and Mary the small flat round bonnet continued in general use ; it lingered long with apprentices, and was spoken of as 'the city flat cap.' It still survives at Christ's Hospital, and in the 'muffin cap' of the parish schoolboy. The stuffed upper-stocks of the middle of the century developed during the reign of Elizabeth into the large paned and slashed bombasted trunk-hose ; the doublet lost its skirts, and the body of it, by lengthening and quilting, was brought to the peascod shape, the whole, including the full divided sleeves, which showed the embroidered shirt, being richly laced and slashed. Hose drawn up over the knee, a wide ruff, a brimmed and slightly conical hat, and a short cloak completed the dress [Pl. xlix, 3]. This costume continued, with slight modifications, until the reign of James I. Simple doublets, and trunks, or full breeches, of cloth, frieze, and canvas, were worn by the lower orders.

The ladies of the courts of Henry VIII and Elizabeth naturally followed the modes of the sovereigns. In the former reign the old-fashioned pedimental head-dress lingered [Pl. lx, 2], the paned lappets being at first pinned up at the sides and then modified into a smarter shape, and finally cut off ; small French hoods, decorated with goldsmiths' work, and little bonnets of velvet, close hoods or cloth caps being worn by the middle and lower orders, with plain gowns and puffed sleeves. In the time of Elizabeth much ridicule was cast upon the vagaries of ladies' dress : on their laced and starched ruffs, supportasses, hoods, caps, kerchiefs, painted fans, ear-rings and dyed hair ; on their costly gowns, kirtles, scented gloves, corked shoes, velvet masks, looking-glasses. gold chains, and pomanders. This Italianate

BARNARD

I

114

COSTUME, MILITARY AND CIVIL

costume is found as the type of 'Vanity' in Emblem Books of the

age. Some approach to moderation in dress is discernible in

the middle of the reign ; perhaps in consequence of the queen's

commands respecting excess in apparel. The costume of the

women of the middle classes, with its plain French hood, ruff,

and gown with a little puffing at the shoulders, could hardly

be simpler. As with the military so with the civil costume of

the sixteenth, 3 century, the monumental effigies, no less than

the painted pictures, supply an inexhaustible source of informa-

tion [Pl. LI, 3].

Among other sumptuary edicts of the fifteenth century,

Margaret, Countess of Richmond, mother of the king, in 1492

issued an ordinance regulating with great detail the mourning

costume for each estate of women. Of these habiliments the

pleated barbe, the surcoat, and the hood are the most important ;

they were of old standing, and are constantly shown in their

varieties on monumental effigies, from the fourteenth until after

the middle of the sixteenth century [Pl. LI, 1] ; the black hood

à calêche and black gown and mantle taking their places before

the end of it.

From this point, touching now but very generally upon such

portions of armour as still survived and carrying the account

down to the end of its use, we may note that arquebusiers of

the Civil War period wore a striking form of helmet, to the

umbril, or peak, of which was fixed a triple bar, a light form

of vizor [Pl. LIII, 5] ; that by statutes of 1672 and 1673 horsemen

were ordered to wear breastplate, back-piece, and pot-helmet

[Pl. LIII, 4], and to carry a sword and pistols ; musketeers

were to have a musket, bandoliers, and sword ; and pikemen,

back, breast, pot, pike, and sword. In the time of William III

the lately embodied carbincers wore breast and back-pieces

and iron skull-caps (the 'privy cap of fence' of the time of

Henri Quatre), sewn into the crown of their felt hats. The

sublime periwig is constantly represented in statues and pictures

of the early years of the eighteenth century as worn with the

cuirass, which had come to be a mere convention of painters

and sculptors akin to the Roman lorica found in the pseudo-

classic sculpture of the time. The effigy (1707) of Sir Cloudesley

TUDOR PERIOD

115

Shovel in Westminster Abbey is a typical example. The plate gorget, then a mere flat collar, continued to be worn over the buff coat during and after the Civil Wars. It remained in ever-decreasing dimensions until the present day, now assuming the form of a small lunated-shaped brass plate, the badge of certain favoured cavalry regiments and the last remnant in legitimate descent of the ancient warlike panoply of the Middle Ages.

BOOKS FOR REFERENCE.

FAIRHOLT, Costume in England, 3rd edition by Dillon, 2 vols. (Bohn Series), 1885.

PLANCHÉ, History of British Costume, 3rd edition (Bohn Series), 1893.

— Cyclopaedia of Costume, 2 vols., 1879.

SHAW, Dresses and Decorations of the Middle Ages, 2 vols., 1843.

LUARD, History of the Dress of the British Soldier, 1852.

SCOTT, Sibbald, The British Army: its Origin, Progress, and Equipment, 3 vols., 1860-80.

FORTESCUE, History of the British Army, 2 vols., 1899.

HEWITT, Ancient Armour and Weapons in Europe, 3 vols., 1855.

DEMMIN, An Illustrated History of Arms and Armour, translated by Black (Bohn Series), 1877.

MEYRIck, Ancient Armour in Europe, 2 vols., 1830.

DE COSSON & BURGES, 'Ancient Helmets and Examples of Mail,' Archaeological Journal, 1881.

BURTON, The Book of the Sword, 1883.

HAINES, A Manual of Monumental Brasses, 2 vols., 1861.

BOUTELL, Monumental Brasses and Slabs, 1847.

— The Monumental Brasses of England, 1849.

STOTHARD, Monumental Effigies of Great Britain, 1817.

HOLLIS, T. & G., Monumental Effigies of Great Britain, 1840-2.

HARTSHORNE, C. H., Sepulchral Monuments, 1840.

— ALBERT, Monumental Effigies in Northamptonshire, 1875.

— — 'The Sword-belts of the Middle Ages,' Archaeological Journal 2 vols., 1839.

COTMAN, Engravings of Sepulchral Brasses in Norfolk and Suffolk,

FRANKLIN HUDSON, The Brasses of Northamptonshire, 1853.

WALLER, A Series of Monumental Brasses, 1842-64.

MACKLIN, Monumental Brasses, 1892.

PUGIN, Glossary of Ecclesiastical Ornament and Costume, 1868.

BLOXAM, Companion to Gothic Ecclesiastical Architecture : Ecclesiastical Vestments, 11th edition, 1882.

112

V

HERALDRY

I. Origin of Armory.

The use of heraldic insignia is only one of the many manifestations of symbolism which we find prevalent in all periods and

among all races. The same instinct of individual display or of

social and military expedience that prompts the tattoo of a

savage and the totem of his tribe, and in a higher environ-

ment is exemplified in the personal devices assigned by

classical art and literature to the heroes of the Trojan War,

or in the eagle of Rome and the ensigned shields of her

cohorts, lies also at the root of that special and minutely

organized system of pictorial language, the medieval 'armory'

(see § 3) of Western Europe. It is possible that a peculiar

impetus was given to the use of armorial emblems by the great

German tournaments of the twelfth century. If so, we may

attribute thereto the general acceptance in different languages

of the term 'blazon,' which is of Middle High German origin,

in the sense first of a shield, then of the bearings on it, and

then of the describing of the latter: the twofold notion of fame

and of the proclamation of it lying at the root of the word.

In the list of purchases for the Tournament of Windsor Park

in 1278 blazona is the term used for a shield. It was however

in France, probably the original home of the tournament, that

coat-armour was first subjected to scientific regulation ; conse-

quently most of the technical terms of heraldry are of French

origin, and it was from France that it was imported into

England as a science, though as yet at an immature stage.

But whatever influence natural impulse or passing fashion

may have exerted in the promotion of this form of symbolism

prior to the thirteenth century, it was the adoption about

ORIGIN OF ARMORY

117

1180 of the closed helm [Pl. LIII, 12] which, by making it im-

possible to recognize leaders on the battlefield, rendered the

employment on their part of distinctive tokens absolutely in-

dispensable. 'Arms' quickly came into vogue among those of

superior birth, and the independent and uncontrolled multiplica-

tion of these emblems that ensued compelled eventually their

organization by central authority, since an indiscriminate use

of them would defeat their object. Without doubt, too, the

growing custom of sealing documents (see § 2) contributed to

induce regularity in bearings, as also did the establishment of

inherited surnames about the same period (see Canting Arms,

p. 135).

Considerations of convenience, and the feelings of pride and

veneration which attached to symbols associated with the ex-

ploits of ancestors or relatives, combined to fix heraldic insignia

mainly on a hereditary and family basis, into which nevertheless

there also entered to some extent the element of connexion by

tenure; while, to avoid confusion even within these limits, coats

were further distinguished as regards seniority and degrees

either of kinship or of matrimonial or feudal alliance, by marks

of cadency or by differences respectively. It may be that the

Crusades, bringing together as they did large numbers of the

upper classes of Europe, assisted the tendency to organization

by illustrating its necessity with striking clearness; the tourna-

ments also, which in England became the mode in and after

the thirteenth century, and which originally were open only

to the armigerous of four generations standing as such (see

under Paternal Arms, § 3), doubtless helped towards the same

end : and distinction acquired in the Holy Land or in the

joust aided in the conversion of temporary or personal into

permanent and hereditary insignia. Indeed, instances exist in

which, on the introduction of armory, a personal device pre-

viously used by an individual was directly, or in some modified

manner, made to serve as the armorial bearing of his family.

Naturally, universal fixity of custom did not immediately come

into operation, and we find cases before 1300 not only of

the canon of heredity in coats being disregarded, but of the

same person using different coats at different times, many of

118

HERALDRY

which appear later as subsidiary quarterings. In the Dictionarius, too, of John Garland, written at some time after 1218,

is a passage which seems to show that the capricious and un-restricted assumption of undifferentiated armorial devices had

not disappeared in the first quarter of the thirteenth century :

'The shield-makers [of Paris] serve the towns throughout

France and England, and sell to knights [militibus] shields

. . . on which are painted lions and fleurs-de-lys.' This appears

to indicate that, side by side with the rise of individualism

in armory and its gradual organization, we have the existence of the state of things illustrated a generation earlier

in the Itinerary of Richard I, where, in the description of the

king's advance from Ascalon in 1192, we read that shields were

adorned, seemingly wholesale, with 'fiery red prowling lions or

golden flying dragons,' thus showing little general advance in

the Third Crusade beyond the fashions of the Bayeux Tapestry.

The explanation doubtless is that fixed and organized armory

began with the most prominent leaders in war, and took time

to work downwards to the mass of those of gentle blood. Still,

in the thirteenth century irregularity was exceptional, and at the

opening of the fourteenth century the hereditary principle may

be regarded as completely established.

The chief peculiarity, then, of medieval armory, as compared with earlier or other symbolical usages, is that the former,

owing to the above causes, was subjected to an organization

with definite and detailed rules, enforced ultimately by official

control, that it was mainly heritable in character, and that it

became the badge of a specific social position. Its mainspring

is to be found, not simply in the love of symbolism, which is

instinctive, but in the need for its widespread employment in

the most serious of human activities, war, and therefore for its

reduction to a set system.

'Arms' were so called from their being originally depicted

upon the most conspicuous portion of the defensive armour,

the shield. To assist in the leading of larger bodies in war,

and for recognition at a distance, they were in addition dis-played on banners. After 1200, when, owing to improvement

in armour, the shield began to diminish in size, it became the

practice to embroider them upon the various styles of surcoat

worn at successive periods till the fifteenth century [e.g. Pl.

xlv, 2, 4]; hence arose the phrases 'coat of arms' and 'coat-

armour.' When plate armour came in they were occasionally

enamelled on the breastplate. Devices on war-shields were

painted flat and unshaded, and sometimes were embossed in

relief on cuir-bouilli. The characteristic of the earliest armorial

bearings is simplicity and boldness of design and strong con-

trast of colours. Thus they well fulfilled their primary purpose

of readily indicating, even in the dust, confusion, and excite-

ment of battle, the identity of the bearer.

A large proportion of these primitive coats is composed of

figures formed by various arrangements of straight lines, known

in heraldic language, from their frequent appearance, as the

'Ordinaries' [Pl. liv, 1–17]. Many, however, of the oldest

armorial shields are merely bi-coloured 'fields' divided into two

or more compartments by vertical, horizontal, diagonal, or inter-

secting lines, and bear no 'charge.' If a beast were borne, it

was usually a lion (perhaps because, besides being the 'king

of beasts,' it was also the emblem of the sovereign), which often,

when not rampant but in the less formidable posture of 'pas-

sant' [Pl. lviii, 7], was termed a leopard, and when it lost size

by multiplication, beyond three at any rate, a lioncel. Objects

obviously emblematical explain themselves, and the admission

into armory of animals, and many other charges that subsequently

appeared, is intelligible enough : but the meaning of the ordi-

naries and certain other of the early devices, the symbolic

purport of which is not evident, which cannot well, except quite

occasionally, be 'canting' signs (see § 3), and which are not

sufficiently decorative to justify their being looked upon as

purely ornamental, is less clear. It has therefore been thought

that most of the ordinaries were not arbitrary abstract inventions

of geometrical permutation and combination, but that they had

a concrete origin in the structural requirements of the more

primitive and larger pre-armorial shield; and that when shields

became smaller and probably less clumsily made, these con-

structional aids were no longer necessary, and remained only as

dummy survivals (after the wont of obsolete things) which were

120

HERALDRY

utilized, however, for armorial purposes. Wood as a rule

formed the principal element in the composition of the medieval

service-shield, and the boards, leather-covered or not, that con-

stituted the body of it, were in pre-armorial times strengthened

by wooden or iron clamps, strips, and crossbars, and by studs,

nails, or rims of metal. Such stays and knobs are seen upon

representations of shields anterior to the age of systematized

armory, and it was not unnatural that they should have been, as

we know they were, gilded or silvered, or fancifully painted

another colour than that of the rest of the shield, as was often

the case with the later non-armorial shields in armorial times :

somewhat as the frame-timbers of houses and as studded and

iron-bound doors were treated. Plates liv, 18–23 and lv, 1–13

show braced pre-armorial shields by the side of early armorial

shields bearing ordinaries, which originally were drawn narrower

than they afterwards became when, owing to the increase in the

number of coats, diminutives were multiplied and ordinaries

charged. Among the oldest charges too are found those given in

Plates liv, 19 ; lv, 8, 10, 13, 15 ; and lvi, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, all of which

may possibly have originated in the highly important metal nail-

heads, rivets, boss-nuts, and cramps of the pre-armorial shield

[Plates liv, 18 ; lv, 7, 12, 14 ; and lvi, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9]. It must

not, of course, be supposed that such charges, when they appear

in coats that came into being after the first days of armory,

arose in this way : without doubt (apart from the element of

heredity or connexion) some symbolical reference or mere play

upon words then dictated the choice of the bearings (see § 3).

Sometimes charges apparently were suggested by artistic forms

that had been wrought out for other purposes and were pressed

into the service of armory. Particularly does this seem to have

occurred in the case of many of the numerous designs of the

cross, the intelligible popularity of which was possibly enhanced

by the Crusades ; but the prototypes of some shapes are to be

found in the metal braces referred to above [e.g. Pl. lv, 5–10].

Plate LIV.

1. Chief.

2. Pale.

3. Pallets.

4. Bend.

5. Bendlet.

6. Bend sinister.

7. Fess.

8. Bars.

9. Chevron.

10. Chevronels.

11. Cross.

12. Saltire.

Dexter side of Shield.

Sinister side of Shield.

13. Pile.

14. Quarter.

15. Canton.

16. Bordure

17 Orle.

18. Pre-armorial, 9th cent. (Leges Longobardorum: Stuttgartiib.)

19. (amovs: Plates (silver roundles) on a chief. (Glover's Roll.)

20. Pre-armorial, 13th cent. (Lewis Chessman Brit. Mus.)

21. L'Orti : a Pale early ordinaries were commonly narrow : temp. Hen. III.

22. Pre-armorial. early 14th cent. From pvs found in Temple Ch.

23. Talbot : Bendlets. Roll of 1277-87.

Lamant Barnard. del.

EARLY ARMORY : SOURCES OF EVIDENCE 121

2. Early Armory : Sources of Evidence.

Among the earliest quite trustworthy armorial evidences are those found on seals, which came gradually into general use after the Norman Conquest, at a time when there was a perpetual shifting of landed property, and comparatively few of the laity at least could write. How the custom had spread downwards by the end of Stephen's reign may be seen from the sneer of the Justiciar, Richard de Lucy, recorded in the Chronicle of Battle Abbey : ' In old times it was not the fashion for every knightling (militulus) to have a seal, which befits only princes and great men.' By Henry III's time however, if not before, a seal had become an essential part of a deed, and seals themselves had become largely armorial. Thus, whereas before the rise of heraldry in the twelfth century devices on seals had been arbitrary, the inscription alone denoting the possessor, the application to them of armory and their widespread use were contemporaneous movements. Necessarily persons not entitled to armorial bearings, yeomen, merchants, and the like, continued to use unheraldic seals. Indeed, the affixing of seals in lieu of signatures continued, perhaps because the forgery of a seal was more difficult than that of an autograph, long after the art of writing had become relatively common, and survives in the conventional seals still placed on many legal instruments. King John could write, but he did not sign, he sealed Magna Carta; and the first royal sign-manual of which a specimen exists in England is that of Richard II. After about 1520 the combination of seal and signature, which often appears before that date, became the almost universal practice, though it was not till 1677-8 that signatures alone were made legally necessary in deeds concerning real property, and heraldic seals did not even then disappear from them at once. Thus the witness of seals extends over something like 600 years.

Since armorial seals naturally would not be extensively used in legal transactions until armory was fairly organized, they are not the oldest evidences, but their heraldic importance is obvious, for the devices thereon must be those claimed, and accepted as borne, at the time of impression, seeing that they are the

122

HERALDRY

acknowledged representatives, as it were, of the bearer. Moreover, as a rule, the owner's name, and sometimes that of his

father, is inscribed round the margin. The frequent breaking, or recasting, by the heir of the metal die of his predecessor still

further narrows the limits of identification. Metal dies were generally made of brass, latten, bronze, or lead, occasionally of

silver, more rarely of steel or gold. Jet, porcelain, horn, bone, ivory, and stone were also used. Impressions of seals were

taken in bees-wax, brown, red, green, yellow, black, or white. In shape, before the thirteenth century, they were generally a

pointed oval, the vesica, which had a religious origin, and when afterwards the seals of laymen commonly assumed a circular

form, ecclesiastics for the most part adhered to the pointed ellipse. The impress was made either plaqué (or en placard),

that is on the face of the document, or was suspended to the deed by a parchment label or a silk cord. Various methods

were adopted to lessen the facility of fraudulent removal from one document to another. A common device for preventing

a seal plaqué from being detached was to make cross cuts in the parchment, turn back the tongues thus formed, and press

the wax on the spot so that it was forced through the orifice and appeared on the back of the deed as well as the front.

But if the whole seal could then no longer be lifted off with a heated knife, the upper half could, and it was probably to the

guarding against such a trick by making it useless that counter-sealing owes its origin. In the case of pendent seals a still

safer means was devised which rendered transference well-nigh impossible : this was to attach the seal or seals to a pendulous

strip cut out of the body of the deed itself. It was thus possible to make on the two sides a pair of inseparable impressions, as

with a coin. That on the inscribed face of the instrument is known as the seal or the obverse of the seal, that on the back

as the counter-seal or the reverse of the seal, the two being regarded as constituting together a single seal. Another term

for the obverse was 'the authentic,' and for the reverse the Secretum or 'privy-seal.' The latter came into use apparently

after about 1170. Both were usually the same shape and size, but often the counter-seal, which almost invariably bore a

Plate LV.

1. Pre-armorial, 11th cent. (Jeremias Apocalypse: Darmstadi lib.)

2. Statevile: Barulets. (Roll of 1277 87.)

3. From Pembruke Seal (Dyshr’s Upton, 1654. Volar, 89.)

4. From Gloucester Seal (Sandford’s Genealog. Hist. Eng. 1707, 139.)

5. Pre-armorial, 12th cent. Lewes Chessman. Brit. Mus.

6. Eudo: Cross within bordure. Quartered by Fiennes.

7. Pre-armorial. (Bayena Tapestry.)

8. Polley : Cross within bordure bezanty [i.e. studded with gold roundles]. First Dunstable Roll. 1308.

9. From Hertford Seal. (An. Dreds LS 43. Record Off)

10. Pre-armorial, 13th cent. (Lewes Chessman. Brit. Mus.)

11. Alex. de Neville, 1374 : Saltire within a bordure. [The bord here is a difference : the Neville saltire without a bord. appears in Glover’s Roll.]

12. Pre-armorial. (Bayena Tapestry.)

13. Champernon: Saltire between 16 bezants.

14. Pre-armorial, early 13th cent. (From pix found in Temple Ch.)

15. Verdun fretty. (Glover’s Roll.)

dward Barnard del et sculp

EARLY ARMORY : SOURCES OF EVIDENCE 123

different design, was smaller. The Secretum was not necessarily

used only as a counter-seal. The severe punishment of abjura-

tion of the realm is on record as having been inflicted for

counterfeiting the seal of another person; and when a matrix

was lost the owner gave public notice of the fact, lest the finder,

or the thief, might turn it to his own purposes; and at his death

it was placed in a box, or purse, closed under the seals of three

'honest persons,' and in due course was defaced, as we have

said, by his heirs or executors. The care bestowed on the safe-

guarding of seals adds to the authenticity of their evidence.

A seal might be either official or personal. The former

furnishes proof of arms attached to a public office, secular or

ecclesiastic, and such also would be the 'Common Seal' of a

corporate body or of a religious house. The latter would show

the personal coat, or the badge, or both, of its possessor. Official

arms naturally came into existence only for business purposes.

Among official seals it is to be noted that the first Great Seal

of Richard I (c. 1189), the first in which a king of England is

represented with the closed helm, is also the first which displays

on the shield an armorial bearing [Pl. viI, 6]. It is a lion rampant

sinister, which seems to be facing a second lion that is invisible

owing to the shield being in profile; the couple forming the

position termed combatant, or counter-rampant. This is con-

firmed by two contemporary writers. William Brito, in his

Latin poem Philippis, makes William des Barres say of Richard,

who was then count of Poitou, 'I recognize the gaping jaws of

the lions on his shield'; and in the Itinerary of Richard I we

read that at the interview between the king and Isaac, Emperor

of Cyprus, in 1191, the saddle of the former was decorated with

'a pair of golden lioncels facing one another open-jawed, one

forepaw of each extended towards the other [beast] as though to

rend it.' To his second seal, struck in 1198, he added the third

lion, but placed the animals passant gardant as now [Pl. LIII, 12].

'The adoption of a triad of lions may have been in conformity

with the taste for the mystic number three, which, with its square

nine, was so dear to heraldry, and to which the shape of the

triangular shield lent itself. From the respective seals of Gilbert

de Clare, first Earl of Pembroke (d. 1148), and of Gilbert de

124

HERALDRY

Clare, Earl of Gloucester (d. 1230), we see how one arrangement

of the strengthening bands that preceded hereditary bearings

may have suggested a later coat. It is in Stephen's reign that

the first beginnings of armorials are seen, and the Pembroke

seal [Pl. lv, 3] shows the long Norman kite-shield, with the

gabled top of that period, stiffened by bars which follow the

direction of the gable, thus forming a succession of chevrons,

or rather chevronels; and in a seal [Pl. lv, 9], c. 1138–48, of

another Gilbert de Clare, first Earl of Hertford (d. 1152), five

narrow gabled ribs are indicated on the shield. Bars were

a natural and not uncommon contrivance for binding together

a large shield, but from the coincidence of this form of clamp

appearing on the shields of two contemporaneous members of

the same family in the infancy of heraldry, it seems probable

that we have here a very early instance of the practical appliance

being put to the symbolical use which was in time wholly to

supersede it. The Gloucester seal [Pl. lv, 4] is subsequent to

the general adoption of armory, and shows the familiar, and by

that time well-established, Clare coat of three chevrons. It may

be mentioned that the helmets on the Pembroke and Hertford

seals are open, whilst the helm on the Gloucester shield is

closed. The 95 seals appended to the duplicate of the letter of

the barons of England to Boniface VIII in 1301, objecting to his

intervention in the English claim to the overlordship of Scotland,

are a valuable body of evidence as to the arms of the leading

men of the kingdom at that date: it was signed as well as

sealed. There are only sixteen counter-seals: this may give an

idea of how far counter-sealing was then prevalent. The

document is preserved in the Record Office. In the British

Museum, too, there is a large collection of early seals. An early

Sigillum and Contra Sigillum or Secretum is that (c. 1210–16) of

Seherus (Sayer) de Quenci, Earl of Winchester, one of the twenty-

five barons appointed to enforce Magna Carta [Pl. lix, 4]. An

interesting specimen of a die is the silver seal of Thomas de

Prayers, circa Edward II [Pl. lix, 3]. The loop of the handle

works a screw which projects the centre of the matrix, so that

an impression may be taken with or without the surrounding

legend ‘Sigillum,’ &c.; further, the centre may be screwed off,

Plate LVI.

1. Pre-armorial, 13th cent. (Lewis Chessman : Brit. Mus.)

2. Hundscote : a bordure. (Roll c. 1286.)

3. Pre-armorial.(Bayeux Tapestry.)

4 foil headed studs are found on pre-armorial shields.]

5. Pre-armorial.(Bayeux Tapestry.)

6. From Seal of Richard de' Clare, 1259-62 Cross bottonnee. (Cotton MS.C. 7, p. 154.)

7 Pre-armorial ; tomb of Helie, Comte de Maine, d. 1110. Montfaucon's Mon. monarchfrançois, V. 1. 370.)

8. Lampowe : cross flory. (Glover's Roll.)

9. Pre-armorial ; tomb of Wm., Count of Flanders [son of Robt., D. of Normandy]; d. 1128.(Sandford's Genealog.Hist. Eng., 1707, p. 17.)

10. From SealofThierry, Count of Cleves, 1311 : an inescutcheon sur-mounted of an escarbuncle. (Survivent of Arms, 137.)

11. Transitional shield : armorial charges and constructional radiatingboss. (Tomb of Geof. d'Anjou(†, d.1151, founderof Hen. II; Le Mans Museum.)

Leonard Burnard del.

EARLY ARMORY : SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

125

when a smaller matrix appears for counter-sealing. This last seemingly is the coat of his mother, who was a Verdun [Pl. lv, 15]. The star shows the point where the screw-motion ends, and also which side to turn uppermost when impressing.

Of prime importance, though not altogether so trustworthy as that of seals, is the testimony of monuments : stone, metal, wooden, or glass. These being sentimental, not legal, in their origin, were of less practical importance, and mistakes in their case might more easily escape immediate notice, and were more likely to be allowed to remain uncorrected. An early stone slab exhibiting armorial evidence is that (c. 1285) of Sir John le Botiler. He bore three covered cups, two of which are repeated on the plate skull-cap worn over his mail-coif [Pl. lxi, 1], a foreshadowing of the later crest. The name and charge arose from the office of king’s butler long held by his family. A later slab, displaying considerably more heraldry, is that (1346) of Sir John Daubygne [Pl. lxi, 3]; and a brass which furnishes a profusion of information as to kinship and alliances is that (1391) of Lady Willoughby de Eresby [Pl. lxi, 2].

These three monuments illustrate the growing custom of placing armorial records on tombs. The gilding, white metal, and coloured resins and enamels that were employed in the armorials of many brasses have rarely survived the wear and tear of time ; for although found on walls and altar-tombs, brasses were usually laid down in pavement-slabs as a substitute for the more expensive and obstructive stone monuments in effigy or in relief, and so were subjected to the friction of thoroughfare. The expansion and contraction of the metal would also contribute to the loss of the colouring matter. But where armorial windows have escaped demolition, the hues of the coats are often preserved for us ; though, owing to certain difficulties connected with glass-painting, they are not always accurate. As a sample of a window record we may instance that (c. 1485) to the wife of a Peyton of Suffolk [Pl. lx, 1], in which her costume tells us both the name of her husband and her own maiden name ; as is not uncommon before 1500, the coat-armour of her family being depicted on her kirtle and that of her husband on her outer mantle, symbolizing her estate

126

HERALDRY

as a femme covert and protected, i. e. a married woman. After

the above date the impaled arrangement, borrowed from the

shield, is more usual, the baron's (husband's) arms being on the

dexter, the femme's on the sinister side of the mantle [Pl. lx, 2].

Plate lx, 3 shows an impaled arrangement by which the arms

of the femme are displayed on her mantle, and those of the

baron on its turned back lining. When the arms are on the

mantle only, or are the same on both mantle and kirtle, they

are those of the lady's house.

Other, though less prolific, sources of evidence are found in

illuminated MSS. as early as Henry III's time, and in priestly

vestments, on which the arms of patrons were frequently em-

broidered : on the border of the Syon cope (c. 1300), now in the

South Kensington Museum, some sixty coats are worked in

colours [Pl. lxxxvi] ; while the stole that belongs to the same

set of robes is adorned with forty-six, and the maniple with

eighteen. Here may be noted the collection of arms (temp.

Hen. V to Hen. VII) carved on the roof of the cloisters at

Canterbury Cathedral, and the stall-plates, prior to 1500, of the

Knights of the Garter in St. George's Chapel, Windsor.

Of the highest value, too, are the Rolls of Arms and similar

armorial collections which contain lists of the bearings of the

royal family, the nobility, and other gentry. Some of these

were schedules of the arms of persons present at particular

sieges, tournaments, &c. ; some were general catalogues of coats

in use, to which class belong the first three of the Rolls about

to be described. 'Glover's Roll,' perhaps the earliest of all,

takes us back to 1240–5 and contains 218 coats. The original

is lost, and we have only a copy made in 1586 by Robert

Glover, Somerset Herald. This does not give drawings of the

coats, merely blazes them, but in so doing supplies the tinc-

tures, which seals do not till long after the invention of the

dot and line method [Pl. lvii, 8], a contrivance in use on

the continent as early as 1600, but, so far as is known, first

adopted in England in 1654, when it appears in Bysshe's

edition of Upton (see § 3) ; while where pigments have been

applied to monuments of stone and wood they have often, like

those on brasses, become obliterated through destruction or

PLATE LVII.

1. Non-armorial, close of 13th cent. (Add. MSS. 11, 639, fol. 520.)

2. Non-armorial, 15th cent.: archer's pavois, apparently with sight-holes and hand-holes, for shooting kneeling. (Arsenal of Berlin.)

3. Non-armorial, 16th cent.; foot-soldier's shield. (From the Weiss Kunig.)

Note.—Figs. 1–5 show ancient pre-armorial methods of strengthening still in use in later non-armorial shields.

4. Non-armorial, late 15th cent.: hand-target. (Mon-bjou Palace Museum, Berlin.)

5. Non-armorial, 16th cent.: hand-buckler. (Triumphs of the Emp. Maximilian.)

6. From First Seal of Richard I.

7. Arms of Monastery of St.Agatha, being those of Scrope of Bolton differenced with a crozier.

8. Tincture points and lines. (Bysshe's Upton, 1654.)

9. Trick of Arms: A = argent, B = azure. (St. George's Roll)

10. Sir Wm. Segar, Garter, 1603-33. (Gwillim, 1724, VI. I. 419.)

dward Barow sculpt.

ACCIDENCE OF ARMORY

127

decay. Some Rolls, however, do provide coloured drawings,

as in the case of 'Charles' Roll,' a fifteenth-century copy of

a Roll of c. 1280–95. Since, although not contemporary, this

is an early transcript, we may take it as a specimen. It is

composed of four membranes of vellum, about a foot wide, sewn

together so as to form one long slip of 81⁄2 feet. The 486

shields, each superscribed with the bearer's name, are arranged

nine abreast in fifty-four rows. This Roll derives its name

from its owner, Nicholas Charles, who was Lancaster Herald

in the reign of James I. Another, known as 'St. George's

Roll,' containing 677 coats, is a transcript made in 1607 by

Charles from an old Roll (then in the possession of Sir

Richard St. George, Norroy), also of about 1280–95. This will

supply a representation of 'tricking,' that is sketching arms in

outline and indicating the colours by letters, which was prac-

tised at least as far back as 1530 [Pl. lviI, 9]. In tricking,

where the same charge occurred more than once on a shield,

often only the first was drawn, the places of the rest being

marked by the figures 2, 3, &c. One of the most interesting

Rolls is the famous Le Siège de Karlaverok, a Roll of Arms

and Chronicle combined. It is a metrical account, in the de-

based Anglo-French of the time, of the siege of the castle

of Carlaverock, on the Solway, by Edward I in July, 1300, and

gives the blazons of 106 bannerets and knights who mustered

on the occasion. The earliest series of contemporary dated

drawings of shields of arms will be found in the Historia

Minor of Matthew Paris, who died about 1259. A list of such

Rolls as have been printed is given at the end of this Section,

but many still remain in MS. An account of a number of both

published and unpublished Rolls will be found in the The Genea-

logist for 1881.

3. The Accidence of Armory and Classification

of Coats.

Armory is that department of Heraldry which relates to

coats of arms and their appurtenances, such as crests, mant-

lings, mottos, supporters, &c. ; but since it was in the execution

128

HERALDRY

of their duties as regulators of armorial bearings that the heraldic officers (see §§ 4, 5) came most frequently and most closely into contact with the community, and since many of their other functions gradually fell into disuse and oblivion, Heraldry and Armory have in vulgar parlance practically become convertible terms : or rather the former has in its application been narrowed down to the latter, while the latter, unfortunately, is in some danger of fading into an archaism.

The scope of this Section, which is concerned in the main with Heraldry in its connexion with History, does not admit of or necessitate our entering into the details of what is known as the Accidence, or Grammar, of Armory : the vast mass of rules and provisions, extending from broad principles to minute and complicated refinements, that constitutes the science of blazonry.

This is readily accessible in a host of works, large and small, elementary and advanced, a list of some of the most useful and easily procurable of which is given later.

It is clear from the descriptions of the coats in the oldest Rolls that a code of accepted custom, the variations in which are but slight, regulated the practice of blazonry 150 years before the first extant treatise on the subject was written in this country, and nearly 250 years before the incorporation of the College of Arms in 1483.

The earliest heraldic works known to have been produced in England were the Tractatus de Armis of Johannes de Bado Aureo ('John of Guildford,' a pseudonym) and the De Studio Militari of Nicholas Upton, who was possibly the author of both.

The former was composed at the suggestion of the 'Good Queen Anne,' first wife of Richard II, and was finished at some time after her death in 1394 ; the latter, dedicated to the 'Good Duke Humphrey' of Gloucester, the Maecenas of the age, was completed probably before August, 1436 ; neither was printed till 1654.

These are in Latin ; the first printed book, and the first in English, that deals with armory, The Boke of St. Alban's, appeared in 1486.

The authorship of the armorial portion, which is based in part upon Upton, is uncertain.

The fact that one of the earliest productions of the English press was a treatise on armory

ACCIDENCE OF ARMORY

129

testifies to the importance and popularity of the subject. An early sixteenth-century translation by John Blount of the De Studio Militari exists in MS., and will shortly be published.

A fundamental principle, imperative for the practical purposes of armory and therefore jealously guarded by both the officials and the bearers of coat-armour, was that no two persons should use the same arms; and that this yet unwritten law was early recognized and enforced is manifest, among other proofs, from the extreme rarity of repeated coats among the many hundreds contained in the Rolls, and from the cases of contested coats that occur ; while, on the other hand, the small number of these cases affords additional evidence to the same effect. Mention is made in the Carlaverock Roll of a disputed coat, when, 'many, man and woman, marvelled ' that two persons should bear the same ; and a judicial combat over a coat is recorded a few years later, in 1312. These controversies naturally arose on the occasion of military expeditions, when the similarity or the irregular assumption of coats would be readily detected ; and the action taken by the Crown in the fifteenth century (see § 5) for the regulation of armorial bearings was due, not to a sentimental regard for the rights of private possession or to a sense of moral outrage at the unwarranted use of coat-armour, but to sheer military necessity. Owing, indeed, to intercourse in the battle, in the crusade, and in the tourney, among the gentle classes of Western Europe, the laws of armory developed at one time to some extent a tendency to become regarded like chivalry and knighthood, not merely as local and national, but as catholic and European ; though this seems not to have applied to countries between which a third nation intervened, as convenience in war was less likely to be affected. Thus, that the bearing of the same arms or the same device, even by a foreigner, was upon occasion viewed with resentment, can be seen, for instance, in the angry words that passed between Sir John Chandos and the Marshal of Clermont on the day before the battle of Poitiers ; or in an episode of that period where a Frenchman challenged to combat a Genoese for displaying the same charge as himself, the head of an ox, the Italian escaping from his dangerous

BARNARD

K

130

HERALDRY

situation by protesting that the head on his shield was only

that of a cow.

Coats, when classified according to their nature and origin,

fall fairly conveniently into ten divisions, with a little un-

avoidable overlapping here and there. The first four are

'Public,' the rest 'Private Arms.' (1) Arms of Dominion are

those attached to dominions, and are borne by sovereigns as

such on their escutcheons, flags, seals, &c. They are not

family coats. (2) Arms of Pretension (i. e. claim) are those of

dominions not actually possessed by the bearer, but to which

he lays claim, e. g. Edward III, who at first quartered the

fleurs-de-lys of France as Arms of Alliance, in token of his

maternal descent, after the lions of England, on laying claim

to the French crown shifted them to the senior position,

France being considered the more ancient and more important

kingdom, and bore them as Arms of Pretension. They con-

tinued to be borne by the English sovereigns until 1801. It

may be noted that Richard II sometimes bore England quarter-

ing France instead of the reverse. To this class, or to

Augmentations, may be referred the arms of an heiress' family

borne (after her father's death and if there be issue) expec-

tantly, on behalf of the children, by her husband 'in pretence,'

i. e. on a smaller shield in the centre of his own, the former

indicating the claim. This was not a common medieval prac-

tice, but is found as far back as the fifteenth century. (3) Arms

of Community are those of corporate bodies, such as cities,

universities, religious houses, societies, and the like. They

are often derived from the coats of founders, benefactors, or

former members of distinction [e. g. Pl. LVII, 7]. Under this

heading may come the arms of sees borne by their bishops:

a bishop being a 'corporation sole.' (4) Arms of Office or

Official Dignity are those connected with official appointments.

They can be borne alone, or impaled with the personal arms

of the occupant, the dexter, or more honourable, half of

the shield being given to the coat of office as perpetual.

Such are those of the Kings of Arms [Pl. LVII, 10]; and

those of bishoprics may be placed either under Class 3 or

here. A bishop is considered as wedded to his see (maritus

ecclesiae), and his personal coat may be impaled with that of

the diocese, but to the sinister. Although this arrangement

appears in the '3d Parliament Roll' of 1515, and is found

indeed as early as 1396 (see § 2), it was a fashion uncommon

before the Reformation, but is in accordance with an old occa-

sional custom of placing the wife's arms first if she were of

higher rank or greater estate. When he dies eius ecclesia dicitur

viduata. (5) Paternal Arms are those that descend from the

first possessor to his posterity. By heraldic tradition perfect

'nobility' (gentlehood) was only acquired after inherited arms

had been borne for four generations (cp. p. 117). This was in

accordance with the formula quia sanguis non purgatur usque

ad quartum. Supposing an Atavus, or great-great-great-grand-

father had 'obteined cote-armor by his desert,' the first to

inherit the coat would be his son, the Abavus, in whom the

arms were said to be 'begun,' and who was regarded as a

'gentleman of coat-armour,' as was his son, the Proavus, in

whom the arms 'grew'; in the next generation the arms were

'completed' in the Avus, who thus became a 'gentleman of

blood,' as was his son, the Pater; while the Filius of the last

was the first 'gentleman of blood perfect,' who, if he could

reckon five armigerous descents on his mother's side as well,

was also a 'gentleman of ancestry.' These exacting qualifica-

tions, if they were ever rigidly insisted upon, which may be more

than doubted, became relaxed as time went on. (6) Arms of

Alliance are derived from 'heiresses,' i.e. females of armigerous

houses, who, owing to the extinction of the males, represent

their families. (a) These arms (see under 2) may be quartered by

those born of an heiress mother, and thenceforward trans-

mitted as a quartering to descendants, whereby is perpetuated

the memory of many old families that have failed in the male

line. (b) In former times the paternal coat was sometimes

placed after, or discarded for, that of an armigerous heiress who

brought in as a wife a great property or was 'of more eminent

nobility': a course which tended to obscure family history.

(7) Arms of Concession or Augmentation were those granted

by the sovereign, or other feudal superior, in commemoration

of an exploit, or to indicate a connexion of some nature, or of

132

HERALDRY

'meer grace.' To the first belongs the addition by Henry VIII

of a composition suggested by the royal arms of Scotland to

the coat of Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey, as a memorial of

his victory of Flodden Field [Pl. LVIII, 1]: to the second the

granting by Henry VIII of a chief, bearing a selection from

the royal arms of England, to Thomas Manners, first Earl of

Rutland, to mark his descent from Henry's grand-aunt, Ann

Plantagenet, sister of Edward IV [Pl. LVIII, 2]: to the third

the concession by Richard II to Thomas Mowbray, first Duke

of Norfolk, of the right to impale the (mythical) coat of Edward

the Confessor, the king's patron saint, with his own [Pl. LVIII,

3]. Augmentations were also borne on cantons, or might be

quartered before the paternal coat. The term 'special con-

cession' was applied to Augmentations which contained charges

from the royal arms, and could therefore be granted only by

the sovereign. These, when impaled, or marshalled, took

precedence of the paternal coat, or they might supersede the

latter. Among Augmentations is to be included the Red

Hand, or badge of Ulster, borne as a charge on a canton, or

on an inescutcheon, by all baronets except those of Scotland.

(8) Arms of Succession or Adoption (a) were those that, in the

absence of heirs by blood, accrued by entail, will, or donation

during the life of the donor, to strangers. Succession to

property passing in this way has often been made conditional

on the assumption of the arms, and usually the name, of the

donor. These arms were borne either in place of, or (if the

donor so willed it) quartered before those of the 'adopted

successor': unless the latter were of a more ancient family, in

which case, according to the armorists, he was not bound to

assume coat or name, 'and yet might enjoy the property.' It

was, however, maintained by some that so long as a single male

heir by blood existed (monks and attainted persons not excepted),

personal coats could not be alienated, no matter what happened to

the property, the bearer having only a life interest, not absolute

possession. The royal sanction was necessary to alienation.

(b) There was another class of Arms of Succession, unconnected

with any question of blood or adoption. These were attached to

lordships or estates, from holder to holder of which they passed.

Plate LVIII.

1. Howard augmented.

2. Manners augmented.

3. Mowbray augmented.

4. Hardres of Kent.

(Camden's Remains,

1674, p. 232.)

5. Kyrell of Kent, Over-lord.

(Camden's Remains, 234.)

6. Rumney,

3 leopards' heads.

7. Orlanston,

lion passant.

8. Howdlow,

crescent

All holding in Kent of Kyrell.

(Camden's Remains, 234.)

20. Actual lady's manche,

12th cent. (Planche's Hist.

Brit. Costume, 1893, p. 80.)

21. Conventionalized

manche. (Tomb of

Wm. de Valence,

d. 1296; Weatm.

Abbey.)

22. Conventionalized

manche.

(Leigh's

Armorie, 1562, fol.

103a.)

23. De-conventionalized

manche.

(Spelman'

Aspilogia, 1654, p. 109.)

dward Barnard del.

They were also termed Arms of Tenure or Feudal Arms, and many ancient 'collateral' shields and early quarterings were coats of such lordships, not of family alliances. In some instances, before the days of marshalling, family arms were discarded in their favour. (9) Arms of Patronage were of two kinds. (a) Those assumed, usually as additions to their paternal arms, by lords of manors, patrons of benefices, &c., to betoken their rights as such ; to which probably in numerous instances the castles, woolcombs, millrinds, wheels, hunting-horns, arrows, &c. that appear as charges owe their introduction into armory, though some such may indicate the terms of a tenure and so come under (b), those granted by the sovereign, or other immediate feudal superior, to holders of land in fee under them : often in consideration of the performance of a particular duty, as castle-ward, stewardship, &c. Frequently in these cases the overlord's coat, differenced, was borne [Pl. LVIII, 5–8] ; or some ordinary or charge was taken from his shield and added to the paternal arms of the tenant, thus forming what was known as a 'composed coat' ; e.g. Hardres of Kent held the manor of Hardres by knight service of Tunbridge Castle, a seignory of the Clares, Earls of Gloucester, and 'debruised' the Hardres lion with a chevron [Pl. LVIII, 4] from the Clare coat [Pl. LV, 4]. Again, in some instances the bearings of a tenant appear to have been suggested by the sword, knife, helmet, bow, arrow, spur, ring, cup, horn, &c., of his overlord, which in many early tenures (c. 1050–1300) were delivered by him to the tenant and held by the latter and his descendants as evidence of the grant. At Trinity College, Cambridge, a deed of 1135 is still preserved to which the knife of the grantor is appended in lieu of a seal. One of the best known cases is that of the rangership of Bernwood Forest, Bucks, held by a horn, which was represented on the coat of arms of the descendant of Nigel, the original grantee ; argent, a fess gules, between two crescents in chief and a horn in base vert. 'Nigel's horn' is engraved in vol. iii of Archaeologia.

(10) Arms of Religion. Ecclesiastics and Knights of Religious Orders at times left their paternal arms and took others made up of sacred objects, such as mitres, keys, or figures of saints. To this division is also to be relegated the so-called coat of Edward

134

HERALDRY

the Confessor assumed by Richard II. These arms, when marshalled, took precedence of all others.

Two other classes of arms enumerated by the old armorists are: (1) Arms of Assumption or Conquest. There was a theory that the bearings of a person who fled, leaving his shield or his banner on the field, or who was vanquished in fight, whether in war or in 'lists of combat,' could be assumed and borne in a sinister quarter, or otherwise added in whole or in part to his own arms, by the victor, jure gentium. (2) Arms of Abatement. 'Abatements' or 'rebatings' were a series of marks of disgrace to be borne on the scutcheon for 'ungentle' acts, such as boasting, slaying a prisoner, cowardice, drunkenness, debauchery, discourtesy to women, treachery, and so forth. It is extremely doubtful whether the former of these two supposed laws of armory was ever actually in operation, and the only examples adduced appear to have been really cases of augmentation; while as to the latter, in the absence of any authenticated instance, we may conclude that an offender would prefer to forgo armorial bearings altogether than publish his shame by displaying an abatement. A practice in which this apparent figment may have originated is that of reversing the coat for treason, as when, in 1323, the Earl of Carlisle and other rebel barons were led to execution in tabards [Pl. LX, 5] whereon their arms were depicted upside down, and this was the manner in which a traitor's shield was said to be rebated. According to the medieval jurists, it was a survival from 'the old form of hanging traitors by the feet.' When, however, a knight was 'disgraded' he was regarded as dead in chivalry, and this inversion of the coat of arms was in consonance with the ordinary procedure at funerals, by which the herald of a defunct nobleman, as his representative, wore his late master's tabard inverted. That this symbolic custom is as old as the first days of armory may be seen from the reversed shields drawn by Matthew Paris in the margins of his Historia Minor when he records the death of the owners. The reversal of the coat of arms formed part of the sentence of Sir Ralph Grey, who was degraded from knighthood (see § 6) in 1464, and the Earl of Carlisle also had been so degraded. Indeed, the displaying of the culprit's shield

PLATE LIX.

1. From effigy of John of Eltham, brother of Edward III, 1336. (Westm. Abbey.)

2. Vide Talbot Banners, Catalog. Heraldic. Exhib. Soc. Antig., 1894, Plates xxv, xxvi.

3. • Seal of Thos. de Prayers. (Archaeologia, xxix, 405.)

4. Seal of De Quenci. (Spelman's Aspilogia, 1654, p. 67.)

CLASSIFICATION OF COATS

135

' with the heels of the arms upwards' commonly formed part of

the ceremony of degradation from knighthood.

In connexion with the origin of coats attention must be paid

to Canting, or Allusive, Arms (arma cantantia, armes parlantes),

arms that tell their tale without words, non verbis sed REBUS :

' the ancient silent names.' These have been prompted by the

name [Pl. Lx, 2], office [Pl. Lxi, 1], personal peculiarity,

deeds, abode, &c. of the first bearer, or of his overlord. They

are very natural and convenient, and therefore exceedingly

common, and form to a great extent the basis of early armory ;

probably far more so even than we know, for many allusions

must have become unrecognizable owing to their ephemeral

character, to linguistic changes, or to alterations in the names of

the bearers. The arms of Thomas Salle (1422) were two sala-

manders salient in saltire. It will be seen that some of the arms

discussed under the above ten divisions were obviously canting

arms.

The coat was often a surer indication of consanguinity than

the surname, the latter being frequently taken from, or dropped

for, that of an estate, while the arms were retained. For instance,

the Lyllings of Yorkshire, who were Lucys by blood, had by

Richard I's time relinquished the name of Lucy and taken that

of Lylling, East Lylling being their caput baroniae ; but they

kept the canting Lucy coat of three luces [Pl. Lx, 1].

4. Heraldic Officers.

Heralds existed long before the rise of armorial bearings.

They acted as messengers of war, peace, or courtesy ; and,

among other duties, superintended trials by wager and num-

bered the slain in battle. But a considerable stimulus was

given after 1300 to the employment of these officials by the

spread of the use of coat-armour, for, being closely bound up

with military arrangements, its direction naturally fell to them.

During the age of chivalry not only the sovereign, but also

many of the magnates of the realm, maintained in their estab-

lishments heraldic officers, whose appointment, it is said, had

to be approved by the royal heralds. Theoretically, it seems

that dukes, marquises, earls, and viscounts, were allowed one

136

HERALDRY

herald and one poursuivant; barons and bannerets a poursuivant only; though whether any such hard-and-fast rule

ever obtained in actual practice may be doubted. We know that Sir John Chandos, banneret, kept his herald (temp.

Edw. III), but this probably was in his capacity of Constable of Aquitaine. As with some of the king's heraldic attendants, these

were frequently designated by the name, or a badge, or other token of the house they served. Such were 'Hereford herald'

of Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford (temp. Edw. III), 'Eagle-vert poursuivant' of Richard Nevil, Earl of Salisbury

(temp. Hen. VI), and 'Esperance poursuivant' of the Duke of Northumberland (temp. Edw. IV), from one of the Percy war-

cries (cp. Shakes. Hen. IV, Act v. 2. 97). Wolsey kept a herald in his train, but in his time only two of the nobility did so:

the custom was then dying out, and became extinct before the reign of Elizabeth. Private heralds are said to have had

authority to grant, on behalf of their lords, Arms of Patronāge and differences.

As their older title of 'Ancient' (veteranus) implies, heralds were often veteran retainers, who in their experiences in the

battle-field, at the tournament, and on ceremonial occasions, had acquired a knowledge of matters armorial. Being some-

times otherwise uneducated men, it is possible that not a few of the fabulous and fantastic excrescences which defaced and

afterwards discredited their science (the ascribing, for example, of coats of arms and 'gentility' to classical, Biblical, and

mythical personages, and the explaining of colours, charges, &c. by allegorical or chivairous fictions) are due to the twofold

object on their part of exalting their calling and of flattering the vanity of their patrons. Still, it is likely that we owe

to them many of the originals of the Rolls of Arms, and to one of the more cultivated among them the Chronicle Roll Le

Siège de Karlaverok; and the historical poem Le Prince Noir was undoubtedly written by the herald of Sir John Chandos.

Monstrelet, too, tells us that in compiling his Chronicles he made particular inquiries from kings-of-arms, heralds, and pur-

suivants, of their recollections; and Froissart says much the same. All these three grades of heraldic officials appear in existence

Plate LX.

1. Margt. Peyton [née Barnaard]. (Window, Long Melford, Suffolk, c. 1485.) Face restored from brass at Isleham, Cambridgeshire.

2. Eliz. Shelley [née Michelgrove]. (Brass, Clapham, 1526.)

3. Anne, Countess of Stafford [née Neville]. (Window, Lichfield Cath., 1480.)

4. Wm. Longsword, E. of Salisbury ; d. 1226. (Effigy, Salisbury Cath.)

5. A King-of-Arms, 15th cent. (MS. Ashmole, 764.)

6. Bacon. (Brass, c. 1390, Gorleston, Suffolk.) Legs restored from FitzRalph brass of same date and pattern.

Edmund. Buynand del.

:

HERALDIC OFFICERS

137

as tar back as the reign of Henry III ; the superior title ' king-of-

arms' (i. e. of armorial emblems), or its obsolete equivalent ' king

of heralds,' being in England confined to heralds in the royal

employ [Pl. lx, 5]. In the Middle Ages the appellation 'king'

was given in France to several officers who performed 'special

functions about the household of the sovereign. Such were Roy

de Ribauldes, whose duties were somewhat those of a combined

chief of police and magistrate within the royal precincts ; Roy

de Merciers, who acted as inspector of the wares, weights, and

measures of the traders that attended the court. In Germany,

when Henry the Fowler celebrated in 935 his victories over

the Hungarians, Reges Ludorum, or ' Kings of the Triumphs,'

were appointed to superintend the tournaments and other mili-

tary exercises. Similarly, in England, we find letters patent

granted in the reign of Richard II, and ratified by Henry VI,

confirming the powers and privileges of a ' King of the Minstrels,'

who appears frequently in our history before and after those

times. So too the Minstrels of France were incorporated by

charter under a king in 1330. The title of ' King-of-Heralds,'

or ' King-of-Arms,' was an analogous usage ; further accentuated,

however, by the fact that, as the 'image of his master,' he was

crowned and consecrated, and wore the coat of arms of the

monarch whose proxy he was.

Edward III appointed two provincial kings-of-arms, ' Norroy,'

and perhaps ' Surroy,' with armorial jurisdiction north and

south of Trent respectively; and there are traces of some

such arrangement still earlier, under Edward I. ' Clarenceux '

came into existence in the person of the herald of Lionel, Duke

of Clarence, third son of Edward III, and Henry V created the

herald of his brother, Thomas Duke of Clarence, a king-of-

arms with the style of Clarenceux and with the office of Surroy,

which however, as a title, if it ever existed, had already become

extinct. In 1420, at the siege of Rouen, the king's heralds

held their first regular chapter, and drew up a code of pro-

cedure for their own guidance. The same king nominated

a herald for the Order of the Garter, and permanently annexed

to that post a new and distinct one of Principal King-of-arms

' over all the servants of arms in England.' Many special royal

138

HERALDRY

heraldic officials, variously named, appear and disappear in other reigns till as late as Elizabeth inclusive: examples of which are ‘Agincourt king-of-arms’ (Henry V, in commemoration of the victory); ‘March king-of-arms’ (Edward IV, from his earlier title, a practice then common with the sovereign); ‘Falcon herald’ (Edward IV, from one of his badges) ; ‘Blanch Sanglier poursuivant’ (Richard III, from his badge of the White Boar); but in 1605-6 the nomenclature of the heralds of the court finally settled down into what it is now.

In 1483 a further stage of organization was reached when Richard III granted a charter by which twelve of the most approved of the officers of arms of the crown were formed into a corporation, and endowed with ‘a right faire and stately house’ in London, thus instituting what came to be known as the Heralds’ College or College of Arms. Garter, Principal King-of-arms, was appointed its head ; under him were the two provincial kings-of-arms, Clarenceux and Norroy, and several heralds and poursuivants, each with his own appellation. The whole College was subject to the Earl Marshal, as President of the Court of Chivalry (see § 6), and the nomination, with the royal assent, of the officials passed into his hands. At the fall of Richard III the members of the College were turned out of their house, and after some seventy years of vicissitudes and temporary shifts for a home, they acquired from Queen Mary I Derby House. This was destroyed by the great fire of 1666, but the records were saved, and the College, as we see it now, was rebuilt on the same site from the designs of Wren.

The chief functions and rights of ‘Garter’ were to arrange ceremonials of embassies, to determine precedence, to grant armorial bearings to and order the funerals of peers, the two archbishops, the Bishop of Winchester (as prelate of the Garter), and Knights of the Garter ; in addition to which he exercised jurisdiction concurrent with, but not independent of, the provincial kings in the conferring of coat-armour. Certain of these privileges, however, were a matter of controversy between him and his brother kings.

The duties and powers of a provincial king-of-arms within his province, or of a herald or a poursuivant acting as his deputy,

PLATE LXI.

1. Sir John Botiler, c. 1305. (St. Bride's, Glamorg.)

2. a. Maud, daughter of Wm. Willoughby, Baron Zouch, and wife of Robt. Wm. Willoughby, 1391. (Breads, Spilsby, Lincs.) b. Arms: Willoughby impaling Zouch.

3. Sir John Daubrune, 1346. (St. Mary, Oxford.)

were to investigate and record the arms, crest, cognizances (badges), 'antient words' (either cris de guerre or mottoes), and descent of every gentleman below the baronage, of whatever estate or degree, except Knights of the Garter; to prohibit any one from bearing another's arms, or those to which he had otherwise no right, or such as were not true armory (i.e. violated the rules of blazon), and from altering his arms without licence; to forbid (a regulation often disregarded) any merchant or other to put a merchant-mark (the prototype of the modern trade-mark) on a shield, the latter belonging exclusively to gentlemen of coat-armour; on receipt of the customary fee, to confirm arms to gentlemen ignorant of their coats, or to give arms to ungentle persons who were fit and deserving; to allow no coats of arms, flags, helms, crests, or anything pertaining to achievements, to be set up in churches at funerals of gentry below the peerage without his permission, and on such occasions to record the armorial insignia, the age, dates, and other information as to the death, burial, marriage, and issue of the deceased. Authority was also given him to enter all castles, houses, or churches, and demolish or deface any armorials there displayed which might not be in accordance with the laws of arms, whether on walls, windows, plate, jewelry, documents, flags, or tombs; and he had the disposing of tournaments and combats.

The heralds of the College acted as assistants or as deputies for the kings-of-arms. They are now all distinguished by names taken from places, which first appear with any degree of certainty as titles of officers of arms of the sovereign in the reigns indicated in the following list, though some were not continuous; but all have been so since the third year of James I. Several of them occur earlier as titles of the heralds of princes or other grandees. 'Windsor herald' (Edward III, perhaps so entitled because prior to the time of Henry V he served as herald of the Order of the Garter at Windsor); 'Chester herald' (Richard II, from the then newly-created principality of Chester); 'Lancaster herald' (Henry IV, from his duchy, or perhaps as old as Edward III's time); 'York herald' (Edward IV, from his duchy); 'Somerset herald' (Henry VII, in honour of his mother's

140

HERALDRY

family, cp. 'Portcullis' below); 'Richmond herald' (Henry VII,

from his earldom). One of the obligations of the heralds was

the instruction of the poursuivants. Under Henry IV Lancaster

was promoted to a kingship, but reduced to herald again by

Edward IV.

The poursuivants (lit. 'followers') were probationary heralds.

In the Age of Chivalry the proper period of their noviciate

was seven years, the usual duration of 'apprenticeships'

in trades and professions. They are named from badges:

'Rougecroix' (Henry V, from St. George's Cross, the badge

of England); 'Bluemantle' (variously given as dating from

Edward III or Henry V, and as so called from the tincture

of the field of the coat of France, or from the colour of the

mantle of the French king, or from that of the robes of

the Order of the Garter); 'Rougedragon' (Henry VII, from

the badge of Wales, which was displayed on one of the three

standards borne by him in the Bosworth campaign); 'Port-

cullis' (Henry VII, a Beaufort badge). The royal blood he

derived from his mother, the Countess of Richmond, a great-

grand-daughter of Edward III in the Beaufort line, strength-

ened his claim to the throne: as the Portcullis was to the

door or the barriers of a gateway, so this descent was, and

thus the accompanying motto put it, an altera securitas.

The person of an officer of arms was sacrosanct: to offer

violence to him was 'no lesse than sacriledge.' The scutcheon

at his girdle, or, from the fifteenth century onward, his tabard,

was his passport.

5. The Visitations.

As early as 1333 the Crown, to prevent bloodshed, had

interposed between claimants to the same coat, stayed combat,

and referred the question to judgement; and in 1386 there was

legislation on the subject (see § 6). Henry V, when preparing

for his French campaign of 1417, went a step further, and on

June 2 of that year issued a proclamation that no man should

bear arms without proving by what ancestral right or by whose

gift he bore them, and claims were to be submitted to officers

appointed for the purpose. Persons who had borne coat-

armour at Agincourt alone were excepted, as a particular mark

of favour : the fact of their having been present on that occa-

sion as armigerous being regarded as sufficient title to arms.

How far the edict was carried out is uncertain. In the four-

teenth and fifteenth centuries grants of arms were sometimes

made direct from the Crown, occasionally through the Chan-

cellor under the Great Seal.

'Visitations,' which may be described as heraldic Circuits

in pursuance of the functions of the officers of arms (see § 4),

are said, though on doubtful authority, to have been made in the

reigns of Edward IV and Henry VII; but a systematic en-

forcement of armorial regulations throughout the kingdom under

royal commission was undertaken in the periodical Visitations

which began in 1528-9 and continued till 1686 at intervals of

about thirty years. This space of time, virtually a generation,

was selected as being 'within memory,' and within which living

testimony was procurable and documents were unlikely to

have got lost or destroyed. One cause of the measure was

that the rising mercantile class and other of the 'meaner

people' were inclined to assume without right or warrant the

emblems of gentility. The Visitations, in fact, were social

rather than military in their origin, for armorial bearings were, in

the sixteenth century, fast ceasing to be a necessary, or even an

important, factor in military array, though for purposes of

display they were still prominent in the field. The dissolution

of the monasteries, too, in 1536-9 probably enhanced the

necessity for their continuance, since the genealogies of the

landed and gentle class had been commonly recorded for

purposes connected with ecclesiastical law and Church pro-

perty, and deposited for security, in the religious houses.

The Visitations disappeared with the last Stuart king. Ac-

cording to the kings-of-arms this was due to the 'continued

disturbances of the State which had kept many of the gentry

from their seats'; but other reasons may be found. There had

grown up a feeling on the part of some of the gentlefolk that

the interference of the heralds was inquisitorial. Again, the

older armigerous families of established position considered

that they needed no official recognition, and conversely, objected

142

HERALDRY

to the recognition of newly-risen families, holding that it dis-

counted the value of heraldic sanction ; and as time went on

this feeling was intensified by the somewhat promiscuous grants

of arms to the latter by the later sixteenth and the seventeenth-

century heralds. The growth, moreover, of an upper-middle

class with commercially acquired wealth, often far greater

than that of the minor gentry, had tended to obliterate the

hitherto obvious dividing line, largely of feudal origin, between

gentle and simple : and this consideration is said to have in-

fluenced William III in refusing to issue a commission for

another Visitation. Thus one of the causes of the establish-

ment of the Visitations ultimately became one of the causes

of their cessation : in attempting to bar the social aspirations

of the nouveau riche heraldry was swamped by him. Other

factors assisted to the same end. The Great Civil War and

the Revolution of 1688 had produced in a measure a new

line of social cleavage, vertical rather than horizontal, whereby

class distinctions had become to some extent obscured by

the more vital considerations aroused in the struggle for and

against civil and religious freedom. Again, the College of Arms

had fallen into temporary disrepute owing to dissensions among

the officials, mainly arising from personal jealousies and from

disputes about their mutual privileges and fees ; and the improve-

ments in the keeping of parish registers after the Restoration

offered a substitute for the genealogical records of the heralds.

The entries, indeed, in the later Visitation Books show that

a considerable proportion of the ancient gentry ignored the

summons of the kings-of-arms; some 'look'd on this matter as

a trick to get money.*

The process pursued in the Visitations, which, in order to

find the country gentlemen at home, were never taken during

the sitting of parliament, and always between March and

September, when country roads were least bad, was as follows.

Commissions were issued by the Crown under the Broad (Great)

Seal to the provincial kings-of-arms requiring them, or their

deputies, to visit their provinces and summon all persons below

the baronage, that used coat-armour or styled themselves esquires

or gentlemen, to attend and prove their right thereto, or, if more

convenient, to receive the heralds at their houses. Circular

letters were sent by the Earl Marshal to the lords lieutenant of

each shire to direct the high constables or bailiffs of the hundreds

and mayors of towns to aid the heralds by furnishing lists of

the gentry, or reputed gentry, resident in their hundreds. The

arms and descents submitted were accepted and recorded, or

'respited for proof,' or 'disallowed.' New families might apply

for and, if suitable, receive grants of arms. Usurpers of armorial

bearings or of the title of esquire or dignity of gentleman were

forced to 'disclaim' by signing a declaration that they were

not gentlemen, or they were disclaimed as such at the Assizes

or Quarter Sessions, and the local officials were forbidden so to

address them. They were further made 'infamous' by having

their names and false pretensions proclaimed by the public

crier and posted up in the market-place nearest to their homes.

Occasionally the heralds appear to have been content merely

to forbid by letter to a usurper the use of arms, and refrained

from inflicting any public disgrace. But while impostors were

in this way weeded out, there is no doubt that, rather than pay

the heralds' fees, heads of families of unquestionable armorial

position frequently disclaimed : an act which would not injure

them locally where their true estate was well known. Many

such simply disregarded the summons of the heralds. On the

other hand, to be held up to open derision as a spurious claimant

to 'gentleness' was a real rebuff to the novus homo who aspired

to rise in social position as he had risen in fortune. In

order to counteract the practice of disclaiming on the part of

armigerous persons, the heralds were directed never to dis-

claim any such on account of inability to pay the fees, and the

Visitation Books contain many allusions to pedigrees and arms

entered gratuitously. The registration of descents by the visiting

heralds was not confined to those of gentlemen of coat-armour.

Nowadays, when the term 'gentleman' is loosely used, with

partly a moral and ethical, partly a professional, educational, and

financial, and with or without an ancestral, connotation, it is

essential for a right understanding of our subject to divest the

idea of all later aggregations, and to appreciate the importance

attached, prior to the eighteenth century, to the title as indicating

144

HERALDRY

simply a definite status. That, in fact, was formerly the only

meaning of the word ; for the community was divided into two

classes, nobiles or gentlefolk, embracing all grades from untitled

gentry upwards inclusive, and ignobiles, or ungentle, those

below, and the right to bear coat-armour was the distinguishing

mark of the nobilis : a condition of society that still obtains in

Germany and Russia. The subdivision into Major and Minor

nobility, the former taking in all above knight, and the special

degrees of ' Excellent ' and ' Princely ' accorded to those above

viscount, are comparatively unimportant, and indeed irrelevant,

niceties of distinction that do not in the least affect the main

classification : between nobilis and ignobilis there was a great

gulf fixed, it was the only social gulf, and it could only be

passed by acquiring the right to bear arms.

It was a proviso of the Earl Marshal that arms should not

be granted 'to any vile or dishonest [unhonoured] occupation,'

and there are instances of kings-of-arms being fined and even

imprisoned for disregarding this order. The Visitation records

made by the heralds were preserved in the College of Arms, and

in questions of genealogy were and still are admitted as evidence

in courts of law. The officers of Arms on their Visitations were

empowered to impose fines, but we do not know that they did

so. They could also cite before the Earl Marshal's Court those

who refused to appear, which would entail on the recalcitrants

trouble and expense at least (see § 6). A monopoly of armorial

business of what kind soever was given to each king-of-arms

within his own province : no painter, glazier, or other artificer

was to meddle with heraldic subjects without his sanction.

6. The Court of Chivalry.

Closely allied with the College of Arms was the Court of

Chivalry (curia militaris, or Court of Honour), of which the

former was in some respects a subordinate department. Origin-

ally the Court of Chivalry was presided over by the two great

military officers of the state, the Lord High Constable and the

Lord Marshal as his deputy, and had cognizance of combats

in which questions of treason, coat-armour, and honour were

involved, also of tournaments, and chivalry generally. Previous

to 1386 the Marshal, in his judicial capacity, acted only as

indispensable coadjutor of the Constable, but he was then

empowered to sit as president, with or without the Constable,

'except in matters touching life and member,' when a Constable

was appointed pro illa vice; and thenceforward his style was

always Earl Marshal. His was the only earldom by office then

remaining in England. He had authority to summon the

officers of arms to assist him in cases relating to honour, coat-

armour, and pedigreee : for such interests, at first touching

comparatively few, had become widely diffused, and special

juridical machinery for dealing with them had become necessary.

In consequence the Court of Chivalry came commonly to be

termed also the Earl Marshal's Court, more especially after

the regular succession of Constables ceased.

There is an instinctive tendency on the part of special

tribunals to extend their jurisdiction, and only four years later

than the above changes, owing to complaints of encroachment by

the Earl Marshal's Court on the ordinary courts, a restricting

statute was passed by Richard II, which provides us with

a clear definition of its legal limits, though not of its heraldic

powers. As regards the former, its purview was confined to

'causes and quarrels touching the honor of Gentlemen and the

integritie of their coate-armors (which ought to be no lesse

deere unto them than their owne lives), whereof the [common]

lawes of this Realme do give no remedie nor action'; and for

the decision of which the Court of Chivalry had the power to

grant combat. Some sixty or seventy years later its position is

thus defined by the Judges : 'The Constable and Marshal have

a law by themselves, and the common law takes cognizance

of it and concurs'; very much as it concurred in ecclesiastical

law.

The Marshalship was in early times on the whole, but

not regularly, hereditary. The tenure was in some cases for

life, or durante bene placito, or merely for a limited period;

while at times the office was placed in commission. It was not

till 1672 that it became the permanent heritage of the Howards,

and in 1677 of the Dukes of Norfolk. The hereditary High

146

HERALDRY

Constableship was abolished as a standing office by Henry VIII in 1521, and thenceforward temporary Constables were appointed for particular occasions, as at coronations, and when a court of chivalry was held to superintend a trial by combat.

In the Middle Ages, when the circulation of money was imperfect, rent largely paid in kind, and transport indifferent, the sovereign, like other great landowners, in order to live upon the produce of scattered demesne manors, and for purposes of superintendence, was in frequent movement about the country ; and the Earl Marshal, as one of the great officers of the royal household, accompanied the king in his peregrinations. The High Steward, the King's Coroner, and the Earl Marshal exercised a peculiar jurisdiction for a radius of twelve miles round the court wherever it might happen to be stationed for the time being; hence the Court of Chivalry was usually held within the 'verge' (circle), as the circumference of that radius was technically called.

When the court was in residence at Westminster the Earl Marshal sat in the Painted Chamber; or in later times at his own house in the Strand, or in the Hall of the College of Arms. In time of war, however, it being the Marshal's duty to 'order battles' and lead the vanguard, the Court of Chivalry followed the army.

When needful, peers and judges were invited to aid in its judgements, and, besides the heraldic officials, the Marshal was also assisted by a Doctor of Civil Law, who 'resolved doubts,' the Law of Arms 'being in most part directed by the Civil Law,' the procedure of which was followed in the Court of Chivalry. Its prison was the Marshalsea.

One of the prerogatives claimed by the Court was that its officers were amenable to it alone, and it also possessed the right of arraigning before it persons who acted as heralds without authority.

Although the Court of Chivalry could order and arrange for a dispute to be decided by combat (a procedure granted only to the armigerous, and for the conduct of which there were fixed rules), still it often peaceably settled differences which otherwise would have been put to the arbitrament of the duel. Typical suits tried in this court between 1312 and 1732, and which were not referred to combat, may be summed

THE COURT OF CHIVALRY

147

up as follows : (1) A accuses B of unwarrantably using the same

arms as A, for which offence there 'lay a combat, even as for

those things which are most sacred.' B (or A, as it may be)

proves his superior right to them by descent and they are con-

firmed to him, the other being forbidden to bear them. The head

of a house could even call on the Court to enforce the bearing of

a difference by a cadet. (2) An action is brought at common

law for calling traitor, and the common law Judges rule that,

combat being the proper test, it is a case not for them but for

the Marshal's Court. (3) C, a gentleman, is cited for striking D,

whom he knows to be also a gentleman, and, as such, unfit to

have such disgrace done him. C is bound over to admit his

fault and to maintain D's reputation against any injurious

comment that may result from the insult ; D, having drawn his

sword at the time of the assault, leaves the court without

a stain on his gentilehood. (4) E summons F for calling him

a 'base, lying fellow,' &c. Defendant pleads that E is no

gentleman, and therefore not capable of redress in this court.

Investigation shows that he is, since the arms of his family

are recorded in the archives of the College of Arms, and his

pedigree is proved. F presumably is punished, but the judge-

ment is not stated. (5) G challenges H, a baronet, as not

fulfilling the conditions required [in those days, 1623] for that

title, especially as regards 'gentry.' H wins his cause. The

same defendant was also proceeded against for quartering

with his own arms others to which he had no right. (6)

J charges K with having slanderously alleged that J ran away

in battle. K is cast in damages, fined, and committed to

prison till he has made payment. (7) L complains that M,

with intent to provoke a duel, has proclaimed that L is base-

born and no gentleman, whereas he is a 'gentleman of ancestry'

(see § 3). The judgement is not on record. (8) N, a gentleman,

arraigns N, who bears the same name but is a merchant, for

using the former's coat of arms though not related. The

prosecutor gains his suit ; yet, despite this, the defendant's

family seem to have persisted in using the coat. This, however,

was in the seventeenth century, when the Court was losing its

hold. (9) The Earl Marshal proceeds against the executors

L 2

148

HERALDRY

of X for displaying at his funeral arms not legally his. This

suit, which took place in 1732, after the Visitations had ceased

for more than a generation, was an unsuccessful attempt to

resuscitate the Court. The prosecution was treated with ridicule,

and although fines were imposed it was found impossible to

exact them.

The severest punishment administered by the Court of

Chivalry was 'solemn disgradation' from knighthood, which

apparently was inflicted with great reluctance, for only some

half dozen instances are known. It was not necessarily

decreed or conducted by this Court, which, however, carried

out the ceremony in the case of Sir Francis Michell, in 1621.

He had been accused by the Commons before the Lords,

and convicted, of official corruption, and the Lord Chief Justice,

on behalf of the Upper House, pronounced sentence of degrada-

tion and directed the Earl Marshal's Court to execute the

penalty. The officers of the College of Arms were ordered by

the Earl Marshal to attend at Westminster in their tabards.

The culprit was placed on a scaffold erected in the King's

Bench Court, wearing the emblems of knighthood, his belt,

gilded sword, and gilt spurs, many of the peers being present

as spectators. A herald then read the sentence which deprived

him of the title of knight. That done, his belt was cut and the

sword fell to the ground, his spurs were hacked from his heels

and flung away to right and left, his sword was broken over his

head and the fragments treated in the same way: thenceforth

he was to be reputed 'an infamous, errant knave.' This was

in the main the regular ceremonial on such occasions. Michell

was further adjudged incapable of employment, fined £1,000,

and confined to his own house during the royal pleasure.

The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries saw the Court of

Chivalry at its best and strongest. The insight given by the

Hundred Years' War into the privileged position of the

aristocracy in France doubtless contributed to a demand on

the part of the quality in England for the maintenance of

a court that dealt with questions in which points of honour were

concerned; with mere personal affronts, with duels rendered

unavoidable in quarrels which 'for want of witnesses could

not be decided otherwise,' and with distinctions of rank where-

with armorial rights and regulations were closely interwoven.

During the social tension, also, among the upper classes that

prevailed throughout the Wars of the Roses the demand con-

tinued; but after they ceased the Court of Chivalry tended to

sink more and more into the position of an heraldic office,

and by 1600 it was steadily becoming an anachronism. Its

revival by Charles I for arbitrary purposes ultimately only

assisted its decline, and in the following century it fell, says

Blackstone, 'into contempt and disuse.' The causes of its

decay were to a great extent the same as those that brought

the Visitations to a close, to which may be added the constant

overriding of its proceedings by the Court of King's Bench, to

which there had always been an appeal from the Earl Marshal :

the common law was ever jealous of the civil law.

It is easy to smile at the Court of Honour in its later

days, when it had done its work and outlived its use : but for

many generations it was in England the localized expression

of that high moral code and that self-restraint inculcated by

medieval chivalry in matters of conduct outside indictable crime

and with which the ordinary law of a land cannot successfully

interfere. That code was undoubtedly in a great measure based

on Christian teaching, but was probably more operative on the

knightly mind through its presentment in the form of noblesse

oblige. The mere existence of a court of this nature must have

acted as a check; and the urging, in a relatively rough stage

of social development, of such precepts among the 'Nine

Virtues of Chivalry' as to be merciful to all, to do no harm

to 'the poor, to show hospitality especially to strangers, to

protect maid or widow from insult, not only refined the higher

classes to whom they were directly addressed, but must have

percolated downwards and affected in some degree the lower

strata of society by the example of their betters; while in such

as enjoined the keeping of a promise to foe no less than friend,

or forbade the slaying of a prisoner or killing in cold blood, we

may see the foundations of International Law and the germ of

the Geneva Convention.

150

HERALDRY

7. Summary.

The history of English armory falls into two periods. The

earlier is that in which the armorial shield was in actual use in

warfare, and, roughly speaking, ranges from 1150 to 1500. As

body-armour improved, the general tendency was for the shield

gradually to diminish in size, till the large three-foot shield,

or thereabouts, which covered the whole trunk of the solely

mail-clad knight of the opening years of heraldry [Pl. lx, 4],

shrank to the small heater-shaped shield of some eighteen

inches long, or less, that served his partly plate-encased descen-

dant as little more than a buckler, or stroke-warder [Pl. lx, 6].

The discarding of the shield by mounted men began as early

as the latter half of the fourteenth century, when plate was

gradually asserting its entire predominance over mail ; and on

the whole its diminution proceeded pari passu with its growing

disuse, till by the end of the fifteenth century it had virtually

disappeared as a weapon. So far as is known, the Aldeburgh

brass of 1360, at Aldborough, Yorkshire, is the last in which

a shield appears as part of the equipment ; the Wantone brass

of 1347, at Wimbish, Essex, is the first in which the effigy

bears no shield. By ordinary foot-soldiers it was retained much

later, but they, as non-armigerous, do not concern us here.

During the first 150 years (1150–1300) of this period heraldry

may be said to have been in process of formation as an exact

science ; from 1300 to 1500 may be regarded as its golden age,

the zenith being reached in the reigns of Edward III and

Richard II.

With the final disappearance of the shield as an implement

of war, about 1500, began the decadence of armory; both the

shield and its bearings survived in their genealogical and de-

corative uses alone. In the days of the service-shield any

alterations in its form naturally were prompted by practical

considerations of defensive utility, and when in those days

it was applied to ornamental purposes, as a rule it was re-

presented in the shape used at the time ; yet even then there

was an inclination to adapt its outlines to architectural and

aesthetic fashions, more particularly after 1400 when the shield

was dropping out of use. Subsequently to 1500, however, its

configuration became entirely arbitrary, and was dictated not

merely by the prevailing character of contemporaneous art, but,

within that limit, often was further distorted by the fancy or the

caprice of the individual artist. Again, the shield, so long as

it was borne in battle, obviously was of more consequence than

the charge; the latter therefore was forced to conform in figure

or in posture to the contour of the former; but when it fell

into desuetude actuality of contour vanished from the purely

decorative escutcheon. All manner of impossible and fantastic

types appear [Pl. LVIII, 9–16]. Some of these were suggested

by their architectural environment. Others were due to a new

practice, which arose after the abandonment of the war-shield

had rendered accuracy in its representation of less moment and

its conventionalization permissible; that of drawing first the

charges and then the outline of the scutcheon to fit them. This

method had one merit: it reduced to a minimum the amount of

unoccupied field, and therein incidentally obeyed a traditional

rule of medieval armory; though the obedience was of an

inverse nature, for it was the need for conspicuousness that had

compelled a large and bold depiction of the charge upon the

war-shield, and the bearing was fitted to the field, not the field

to the bearing. Through the various stages of the classical

revival the conformation of shields continued to follow architec-

ture, and occasionally we find identical reproductions of Greek

[Pl. LVIII, 17] and Roman models [Pl. LVIII, 18, 19]. The sources

of the examples given on Pl. LVIII are:—Fig. 9, the Barnard wood-

carvings at Abington Hall, Northants, 1485–1508; Fig. 10, the

monument of Abbot Ramryge, at St. Alban's, 1529; Fig. 11, the

arms of Anne Bullen, from Willement's Regal Heraldry, Pl. XVI;

Fig. 12, the Great Seal of Katherine Parr, Archaeologia, v. 232;

Fig. 13, a stone carving of the arms of Edward VI over the

entrance at Penshurst Place, Kent; Fig. 14, the Great Seal of

Edward VI, 1547; Fig. 15, the achievement of Elizabeth, Harl.

MS. 6096; Fig. 16, Leigh's Accedence of Armorie, fol. 16 b,

1562, apparently a cartouche, or oval shield, on a bracket;

Fig. 17, cp. the shields of the Amazons, Petit, Dissertatio de

Amazonibus, Amst. 1687, p. 180 et seq.; Figs. 18 and 19,

152

HERALDRY

Bolton's Elements of Armorie, 1610, p. 147, and cp. Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, 1890, ii. 80.

Although broad-based shields were not unfrequently employed in war contemporaneously with pointed shields between 1200 and 1500, still one striking normal difference in the decorative escutcheons of the sixteenth and succeeding centuries is the usual widening of the base, a tendency to which had set in from about 1450 onwards.

This alteration was introduced for greater convenience in quartering a number of coats, a custom uncommon before 1500; numerous quarterings moreover would make a shield too indistinct and confusing for military use.

Later, the canon of filling the field came to be disregarded, and charges decreased in their proportions relatively to the size of shields, the shapes of which remained fanciful.

This new phase of armorial and artistic deterioration had already set in under the later Tudors, but proceeded from bad to worse in and after the following century.

To this was added the further fault of multiplying and crowding charges to confusion.

Curiously enough, as shields became unreal and conventional, animals charged upon them tended to become unconventional and quasi-natural.

This sacrifice of dramatic to literal truth was by no means an improvement from an emblematic point of view, for by being naturalized in appearance they lost in symbolical force.

Thus there was a debasement not only in the shields, but also in the bearings.

The conventional armorial lion, for instance, of the Middle Ages symbolizes in its perfected type all the peculiar features and powers of the beast, which to that end are grotesquely exaggerated, in order that its presentment may be as terrific as possible.

Its majesty, ferocity, agility and rampageousness, are intentionally portrayed with extreme and grim extravagance.

Its inevitable activity is indicated by the sinuous leanness of a body scarcely thicker than the many-tufted tail with which it was supposed to lash its fury, to cover up its tracks, and to describe around itself a charmed circle in the sand as a ring-fence to enclose its prey; while being 'armed and langued,' that is having its teeth and tongue and eagle-like claws depicted, of a different colour from the

rest, those aggressive and ravening members are brought into

special prominence [Plates lix, 1, 2; lviii, 2-4. There is

a particularly beautiful lion on the stall-plate (c. 1421) of Sir

Miles Stapleton, K.G. (d. 1364) in St. George's Chapel, Windsor.]

And, apparently, common sense was not shocked; presumably

because a lion was rarely seen in England. The same change

from conventionalization to realism affected also inanimate

charges, a case of which is shown in Pl. lviii, 20-23, which

illustrate the manche, Fig. 23 marking a return to the uncon-

ventionalized form of the actual sleeve in which the bearing

originated.

The substitution of the concrete for the abstract dealt a

further blow at genuine symbolism. As an example of this

may be adduced the picture, rather than arms, granted in 1605

to the Gardeners' Company of London. Two centuries before,

a spade, or a rake, would have sufficed; but here we have a

landscape, embellished with flowers, and in the foreground

a man digging. The eighteenth and the first half of the nine-

teenth century saw armory at its worst. In the motley collection

of objects, heraldic and pictorial, that crowd the coat devised

for Lord Nelson are jumbled together four ordinaries and a

cross flory, blazing bombs, a seascape, a palm-tree, a ship-

wreck, a ruined battery, and an inscription. A rich and varied

store of debased heraldry is to be found throughout the whole

series of English book-plates, which did not come into vogue

till armorial decay had set in.

It requires some effort of the imagination for us fully to

realize to how great an extent heraldry in its numerous

branches, aspects, and applications, in one way or another

according to the age, entered directly or indirectly into the

lives of our forefathers prior to the eighteenth century. Its

importance was unquestioned and unquestionable, its significance

intense. In battle and in duel, in pageant and in joust; on

armour, weapons, shields, and flags; on housings, harness,

equipages, and tents; in the crest, the badge, the device, the

livery, and the cri de guerre; in architecture, whether military,

ecclesiastical, or domestic, without doors or within; on the

gate-house of the castle, on the chimney-hood of the hall; on

154

HERALDRY

wall or in window of manor-house and church; on roof-beam

or on ceiling, on pavement and on tomb; on tapestry, on

furniture, on panel, and on on plate; on the clothing of both

sexes, and on the vestments of the priest; on jewellery, on

bindings, in illuminations, and in seals; in the class-barrier

fixed at table by the 'Salt,' and in many an ale-house sign; in

the figure-heads and names, and on the gunwales, masts, and

sails of ships [e.g. Pl. LXII, I]; at the Visitations of the officers

of arms, and at the gorgeous heraldic funerals of the gentry;

in the armorial allusions in which early literature abounds (one

of the indications that a knowledge of heraldry formed no small

part of the education of gentle men and women), and in the

political songs of the people where great men's badges did duty

for their names; at every turn and in every guise it met the eye

or ear. The yeoman, who served as hobilar, archer, or billman,

and who, as ungentle, bore no coat, read his place in camp and

field by the bearings on the banner or the pennon of the

commander in whose train he fought, in all likelihood the only

language he could spell. And long after armory ceased to be

a factor in military array, its social and genealogical import

remained vigorous. To the diverse sentiments of the jealous

gentleman of ancient lineage, of the new-created gentle, of the

aspirant to gentlehood, and of the rejected of the heralds who

had been 'disclaymed to be noe gent,' it appealed as a very real

thing full of precious meaning. Coat-armour was the preuve

de noblesse of the possessor, it was the hall-mark coveted by

the parvenu.

ROLLS OF ARMS

155

A LIST OF SUCH ROLLS OF ARMS AS HAVE

SO FAR BEEN PRINTED.

Name of Roll.

No. of

Coats.

Period or Description.

Reference.

'1st Matthew Paris'.

88

temp. Henry III

Historia Minor Mat. Par.,

ed. Madden, Rolls Series.

'Glover'

218

c. 1240-5

ed. Nicolas, 1829, and Ar-

mytage, 1868.

'Planché'

696

End of Hen. III.

Genealogist, 1886-7.

'Walford'

180

c. 1275-80

Archaeologia, xxxix. 380;

Leland's Collectanea, ed.

Hearne, 1715, ii. 610.

'Dering'

324

Thirteenth century (?)

Reliquary, 1876-8.

'St. George'

677

c. 1280-95

Archaeologia, xxxix. 418,

and ed. Armytage (but

wrongly named 'Charles'),

'Charles'

486

c. 1280-95

Archaeologia, xxxix. 399.

'Camden'

253

c. 1286

Genealogist, 1879.

'Original Camden'

270

c. 1278-85

ArchaeologicalJournal,1882.

'Segar'

212

c. 1280

Genealogist, 1880.

'1st Nobility'

93

Barons at Salisbury Parlia-

ment, Sept. 21, 1297.

Notes and Queries, 1876.

'2nd Nobility'

39

Barons at London Parlia-

ment, March 8, 1299.

"

"

'Falkirk'

111

Those present at the battle,

June 22, 1298.

Reliquary, 1875.

'3rd Nobility'

33

Barons at London Parlia-

ment, March 6, 1300.

Notes and Queries, 1876.

'Carlaverock'

106

Bannerets, &c. at the siege,

July, 1300.

ed. Nicolas, 1838, and

Wright, 1864.

'Guillim'

148

c. 1300

Genealogist, 1877.

'Nativity'

79

Knights made (?) after Feast

of Nativity, c. 1303-7.

Reliquary, 1875.

'Harleian'

191

temp. Edward I or II

Genealogist, 1886.

'Parliamentary'

1110

temp. Edward I or II;

grouped under counties,

perhaps an official record

of those eligible for Par-

liament as knights of the

shire.

Nicolas, 1829;

Palgrave's

Parliamentary

Writs,

1827;

and Mores, 1749.

'4th Nobility'

13

Barons at Westminster Par-

liament, April 28, 1308.

Notes and Queries, 1877.

'1st Dunstable'

235

Those present at Tourna-

ment at Stepney (not

Dunstable), 1308.

Collectanea Topographica et

Genealogica, 1837.

'5th Nobility'

20

Barons at Westminster Par-

liament, April 27, 1309.

Notes and Queries, 1877.

'Boroughbridge'

214

Those present at the battle,

March 16, 1322.

Genealogist, 1884;

and Pal-

grave's

Parliamentary

Writs, 1830.

'Kent'

60

temp. Edward II or III;

Kentish coats.

Notes and Queries, 1875.

156

HERALDRY

Name of Roll.

No.of

Coats.

Period or Description.

Reference.

'Powell'

'and Dunstable'

627

136

temp. Edward III

Those present at Tourna-

ment at Dunstable, 1334.

Reliquary, 1889-90.

Collectanea Topographica et

Genealogica, 1837.

'Cotgrave'

554

temp. Edward III ; an Ordi-

nary of Arms,i.e. classified

and possibly an official

record.

ed. Nicolas, 1829.

'1st Calais'

116

Commanders at the siege,

ed. Mores, 1749.

1345-8.

'2nd Calais'

117

Knights made at the capitu-

lation, 1348.

Notes and Queries, 1875.

'Grimaldi'

162

After 1338

Collectanea Topographica et

Genealogica, 1834.

'Willement'

'Rouen'

601

107

c. 1392-(?) 1397

Those present at the siege,

ed. Willement, 1834.

Notes and Queries, 1880-1.

'6th Nobility'

84

Arms of the Nobility, mid.

Henry VI.

"

"

'Atkinson'

'Jenyns'

88

409

temp. Henry VI

20th Edward IV

Genealogist, 1877.

Original Norman-French

version in Antiquary,

1580 ; English translation

in Reliquary, 1885-6.

'3rd Parliament'

50

Lords spiritual and tem-

poral at Westminster

Parliament, Feb. 5, 1515.

ed. Willement, 1829.

NOTE.—The first five 'Nobility Rolls' are all by the same hand, and the numbers

of coats here given do not, of course, represent the numbers of persons attending

these parliaments : a coat being tricked in the Rolls only on the first occasion

of its appearing.

BOOKS FOR REFERENCE.

Planché, The Pursuivant of Arms, 2nd edition, 1859 (critical and

historical: an important book).

Boutell, Heraldry, Historical and Popular, 3rd edition, 1864 (general).

Woodward, Heraldry, British and Foreign, new and enlarged edition,

2 vols., 1896 (general).

Guillim, Display of Heraldry, 6th edition, 1724 (a classic).

Edmondson, Complete Body of Heraldry, 2 vols., 1780 (especially valuable

for references).

Woodward, Ecclesiastical Heraldry, 1894.

Bedford, The Blazon of Episcopacy, 1897.

Boutell, English Heraldry, 6th edition, 1899 (elementary).

ADDENDA TO PAGE 156.

Name of Roll.

No. of Coats.

Period or Description.

Reference.

'Holland's'

47

c. 1299

Antiquarian Magazine, 1882.

'Philipot's'

42

Revised Version of the Kent entries in 'Parliamentary Roll,' made temp. Edward II.

Antiquarian Magazine, 1882.

'3rd Calais'

24

A fragment. Lords and Captains slain and drowned at the Siege.

Antiquarian Magazine, 1882.

'Military'

249

temp. Henry VI

Antiquarian Magazine, 1883.

'Gentry'

36

temp. Edward IV

Antiquarian Magazine, 1882.

'Jenyns' Ordinary'

1087

temp. Edward IV

Walford's Antiquarian, 1885-7.

Barnard's Companion to English History.

LIST OF BOOKS

157

Clark, Introduction to Heraldry, revised by Planché, 18th edition, 1892 (elementary).

Parker, Glossary of Terms used in Heraldry, new edition, 1894.

Elvin, A Dictionary of Heraldry, 1889.

Eve, Decorative Heraldry, 1897 (artistic).

Grazebrook, G., The Dates of Variously-shaped Shields, privately printed, 1890.

Noble, A History of the College of Arms, 1805.

Grazebrook, G., The Earl Marshal's Court in England, privately printed, 1895.

Moule, Bibliotheca Heraldica, 1822 (an exhaustive analytical bibliography down to that date).

Gatfield, Guide to Books and MSS. relating to English and Foreign Heraldry, 1892.

Board of Education, Classed Catalogue of Books on Heraldry, 1901.

Papworth, Ordinary of British Armorials, 1874.

Burke, General Armory.

N.B.—Of the last two books each is the complement of the other : the former gives coats and names, the latter names and coats.

VI

SHIPPING

1. Shipping before the Norman Conquest.

If we leave aside such vessels as may have been used by the

ancient Britons, as well as the fleet, whatever its character, that

Caesar describes as assisting the Veneti against him, we may

refer the beginning of the English navy to the institution of the

Classis Britannica, or Classiarii Britannici (according to the

respective readings of French and English antiquaries), by the

Roman Caesars to ensure the command of the Channel and

the North Sea and the protection of the limiting shores. His-

torically therefore, in heirship if not in institutions, we may

regard our navy as directly descended from that of Rome;

like it a supreme factor in the forging of the empire, and only

exceeding its forerunner in the extent of its sway. The exact

date of the formation of the British division of the Roman fleet

is unknown, but it is supposed to have been created by Claudius

at the time of, or shortly after, his invasion of Britain in A. D. 43.

We know that, later, its ports were Bononia (Boulogne)—the

headquarters—Dubris (Dover), Rutupiae (Richborough), Portus

Lemanis (Hythe), and other places, and that at a still later

period it grew so large that it was divided into twelve sections

attached to additional stations extending down the Channel on

the Gallic shore. It is, perhaps, hardly a flight of antiquarian

fancy to see in the stations on the ‘Saxon Shore,’ rather than

in Teutonic institutions, the germ of the combination afterwards

famous as the Cinque Ports, a germ stimulated into growth by

strategic position, tradition of naval warfare, and habit of sea-

faring life. All our knowledge of the Classis Britannica has

been gained from funeral inscriptions, and from them we learn

that there were corporations of carpenters, caulkers, sail-makers,

and others at Regnum (Chichester) in connexion with it. Of

the ships we can only surmise that they were of the Mediter-

ranean galley type with such modifications as experience

showed to be necessary in a wilder sea than the Mediterranean,

but it is possible that certain local forms and peculiarities are

survivals from this forgotten source. The name of one ship,

Tritemis Radians, is preserved in an inscription, and should

be mentioned as the earliest name of a Romano-British ship

that has come down to us. The Classis Britannica affords us

the earliest example of the influence of sea-power in the history

of these islands, since by controlling it Carausius was enabled,

in A.D. 286, to declare himself Emperor of Britain, and he and

his successor Allectus retained their independence as long as

they held the command of the Channel.

The Roman galley with its one mast and sail, large, heavily

built, beaked for ramming, and essentially depending on human

muscle for motive power, died out without establishing itself,

being an extraneous product brought by foreigners and going

with them. It was different with its successor, common in the

main to Anglo-Saxons, Danes, and Normans, who may be con-

sidered together as the Scandinavian group. The Scandinavian

ship, galley of course, but sufficiently well designed, stable, and

weatherly to be used also as a real sailing ship, possessing

characters to which ship designers have returned to-day, became

native here with its inventors, and remained for centuries the

model of the northern war-ship until changes in naval arms and

tactics modified shipbuilding–distinctly for the worse. How-

ever, it must always be remembered that, side by side with these

military ships described and illustrated in histories, there was

invariably the plodding cargo-ship constructed not for speed

but for profit, tub-shaped, round-bowed, and flat-bottomed,

unobtrusive, but in the end the only foundation on which

military navies can be built up. The galleys bulk largely in

Roman history, but behind them were merchantmen of 250 tons ;

the Northmen were traders before they were ravagers, and in

the Anglo-Saxon laws we find customs and commercial regula-

tions, including a primitive insurance, which imply the existence

160

SHIPPING

of a relatively large trade. The turn of the cargo-ship came in

the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, when, by the revolution

due to the introduction of artillery, consequent tactical necessi-

ties, larger crews and longer voyages, with the additional stores

needed, it ousted the galley model and remained in possession

until the present century, much to the injury of sea-going

qualities.

The plate given here of what is known as the Gokstad ship

[Pl. LXI, A] found in a burial-mound, the grave of some forgotten

chief, in Southern Norway in 1880, and assigned to the ninth

century, will illustrate generally the qualities of the vessels in

use for many centuries until military developments, especially

the gradual use of cargo-vessels in warfare, led to larger and

heavier ships of higher freeboard. This Viking ship, clincher-

built, caulked with hair and iron-fastened, was 66 feet long on

the keel and 78 feet over all, with 15 feet extreme breadth, and

the reader will notice the beautiful proportions, the sharp entry

and run fore and aft, the great sheer, or rise, at stem and stern,

and the general combination of lightness, strength, and grace.

All the Scandinavian ships conformed to this model, although

classified under many different names; swiftness, except in the

knerrir, or cargo-carriers, being the chief aim of the builders.

Ships were usually from 50 to 150 feet, or more, in length; one

belonging to Cnut the Great is known to have been of at least

300 feet. They had from twelve to thirty-five 'rooms' or seats

for the rowers, and the larger vessels were decked, with cabins

below and a raised platform aft. Externally they were painted

white, blue, red, or any combination of colours, with the warriors'

shields, also of different colours, ranged round the gunwales,

both to save space and to serve as a protection. Both ends of

the vessel were alike, so that it could be steered from either by

the paddle used everywhere until the invention of the rudder.

Standards and pennants are spoken of in the Sagas, and there

was one mast with a square sail of woollen stuff, white, or in

coloured stripes of blue, red, and green. There are references

to fighting tops on the masts, but they were probably a late

introduction. As the two-armed iron anchor was certainly used

by the Romans, as it is shown in the Bayeux Tapestry, and as

PLATE

LXI

A

THE

GÖKSTADT

BOAT.

(From

the

Restored

Model

at

the

Pitt

Rivers

Museum,

Oxford.)

ANGLO-SAXON AND DANISH SHIPPING

161

the Northmen learnt the use of the sail from the Romans, they

may be supposed to have copied the anchor, at first stockless,

but there is no positive evidence on the point. Ships were

named, and the name usually bore a direct relation to the

figure-head which was invariably present in the shape of a

wooden, or metal and gilt, dragon, or head of an animal or of

a bird. The poetic sense latent in the Northern races ex-

pressed itself in such names as Deer of the Surf, Sea-king's

Deer, and Horse of the Sea, while a sail was sometimes

called The Cloak of the Wind. It was in vessels such as

these, really much more seaworthy than their successors in

later centuries, that the Anglo-Saxons came to England, that

the Danes invaded the Anglo-Saxons, and that William I

crushed both, although in his time signs of change were already

apparent; it was also in such vessels that the Vikings ranged

the Mediterranean, and discovered Iceland, Greenland, and

America.

Anglo-Saxon continental commerce extended from the North

German ports to the Bay of Biscay, although it was not carried

wholly in English ships, but the existence of a regular system

of port dues implies a trade of some magnitude. From the

time of the complete settlement shipbuilding had probably been

retrograding, and the only instance known to us of any im-

provement is in the 'long ships,' designed and built by Alfred,

pulling sixty oars, and described as being swifter and steadier

than the Danish. The Jutes, Saxons, and Angles had never

been so bold a race of seamen as the Danes, and the settlement

of the latter was needed to stimulate commerce and navigation.

It seems probable that, as a whole, the navies of the Anglo-

Saxon and Danish kings were based on a more or less per-

manent state organization, and were larger than those of the

continental powers, whose fleets, outside the Mediterranean,

hardly existed in a specialized form. But English superiority

in this respect was not necessarily due to greater political saga-

city, but to political and geographical needs which automatically

enforced certain consequences.

It is unnecessary to notice here the continual maritime battles

the Anglo-Saxons fought, usually to their loss, with their oppo-

BARNARD

M

162

SHIPPING

nents; or to do more than mention the extraordinary legends

associated with Edgar (A.D. 959-975), who is said to have

asserted the sovereignty of the British seas, and to have had

from 3,600 to 4,800 ships, numbers which imply at least 180,000

to 240,000 seamen and soldiers. More authentic is Æthelred's

levy, in 1008, of a vessel, or an equivalent payment in money,

from every 310 hides of land, the earliest precedent for the

legality of ship-money.

2. The Cinque Ports.

Whatever may have been the cause of his remissness, Harold's

loss of the command of the Channel, and his neglect of the

elementary strategic principle of attacking the enemy on his own

coasts, cost him crown and life. The greater part of Harold's

fleet seems to have been carried away by his sons, and the

course of events indicates that for some years the Conqueror

had practically no navy. In such circumstances the association

known as the Cinque Ports—of Dover, Romney, Sandwich,

Hastings, Hythe, and other places—came into prominence, and

although accustomed to render especial service to the Crown

before the Conquest, now, by the habit of comparative discipline,

co-ordinated effort, and comradeship, became for two centuries

the backbone of English fleets, and sometimes with its own

strength alone successfully maintained an equal maritime struggle

with France. The Cinque Ports fleet was the analogue of the

Channel Squadron of to-day, always mobilized or ready for

mobilization.

One result of the Conquest was that the Channel, from being

a field of combat between opposing races, became a waterway

uniting two portions of the same empire; under our Angevin

kings the small kingdom of France was ringed round by Eng-

lish possessions or independent feudatories, nor had the French

king direct or indirect control over one foot of seaboard until

Philip Augustus seized Normandy in 1204. Therefore the ser-

vices of the Cinque Ports were chiefly rendered during the

thirteenth and fourteenth centuries; previous to that era their

prosperity and loyalty were fostered by charters and privileges

THE CINQUE PORTS

163

accorded by successive monarchs, and their efficiency perfected

by training in crushing piracy (an occupation in those early cen-

turies merely a branch of trade), in supplying naval contingents

for Scotch and Welsh wars, in transporting troops and other

duties. When their full strength was called upon they were

required to furnish fifty-seven ships and some 1,300 men for

fifteen days at their own expense, and for any longer period

at the expense of the Crown. The Portsmen came first into

national prominence during the reign of John, to whom, with

the exception of one short interval, they remained faithful

during the entire reign, and it was mainly owing to their sup-

port that he was able to retain his crown. In 1217 the Cinque

Ports justified the exemptions and privileges that had aroused

the jealousy of other coast towns by winning the first decisive

sea-battle in English history. A single land-victory may decide

a campaign, but rarely a war; the results of a sea-victory are

frequently more far-reaching and may mean the ruin or the

salvation of a nation. In this instance the immediate conse-

quence of the engagement off the South Foreland, on August

24, 1217, was to ensure the independence of England and the

retirement of the French invader. Within less than three

weeks–on September 11–Lewis of France, his communica-

tions destroyed, signed a peace and left England. Seldom in

history can cause and effect be so clearly connected.

The Cinque Ports fleet was sometimes called “The Royal

Navy of the Cinque Ports,’ but during the whole period of its

existence there was always available, side by side with it, a force,

more or less strong, of royal ships and galleys and the whole

strength of the kingdom in merchant vessels. It was of these

latter, if we exclude the reign of Henry V, that the bulk of the

fleets consisted to the time of Henry VIII; only one-thirtieth

of the ships collected by Edward III for the reduction of Calais

belonged to the Crown, and probably ordinary fleets were often

without any royal vessels at all. As the royal ships belonged

exclusively to the king, and had to be maintained from the royal

revenues, it was to his interest to use, as much as possible, the

Cinque Ports and merchantmen, since the latter only required

some temporary additions to convert them into fighting ships.

M 2

164

SHIPPING

The steady growth of commerce, due to successful war and the extension of English dominion through four centuries, tended to the increase of merchantmen available and to a diminution of the importance of the Cinque Ports. An ordinance of Henry II in 1181 forbidding the sale of English ships to foreigners implies not only a recognition of the value of a native marine but also that shipbuilding was a flourishing industry. The creation of a great Crown navy by Henry V, the beginning of a new era, the increase in the size and cost of ships, and the physical changes caused by the sea to the injury of the Ports, ended in the destruction of their national utility. The days when 'they were enfranchised that they might be a guard and a wall between us and foreigners' were over; a Cinque Ports squadron was in commission from September, 1444, until April, 1445, which must be almost or quite the last instance of the employment of the Ports in their associated capacity. At the head of both the civil and military business of the Five Ports was the Warden, at first always the governor of Dover Castle, afterwards usually a courtier, and now commonly a politician. But in the Middle Ages both his duties and his privileges were very real, rendering him an important personage, and frequently leading to friction with the Lord Admiral with whom he was often in conflict.

3. Shipping from William I to Henry V.

It will be convenient to consider here as a whole the technical details of shipping between the Conquest and the reign of Henry V, when begins the development of the modern ship. Besides the spur of growing commerce and its corollary, the fact true in all ages, that the larger a merchantman the cheaper relatively it is to work, the most important stimulus to advancement was derived from the southern races during the Crusades. From the dawn of human progress until the re-discovery of America the Mediterranean was the centre of maritime advance ; the art of building, improvements in rigging and sailing, increase in size, the application of tactics to the formation and handling of fleets in action, maritime codes,

WILLIAM I TO HENRY V

165

signalling, and other details, all had their origin there. While

England was using 50 and 100 ton vessels, Barcelona, Venice,

and Genoa were building three-decked ships capable of carry-

ing hundreds of tons of cargo and hundreds of passengers ; in

such circumstances the Crusades, by bringing the Northerners

into contact with more civilized races, necessarily tended to

advancement, although the effect was not immediate since Eng-

land had not then any use for large ships. English ships,

however, must frequently have been larger than is usually

supposed, if it be true that there were 300 or 400 persons on

board the Blanche Nef when she was lost with Henry I's son

William in 1120 ; and in 1170 a chronicler records the loss of

another vessel with 400 people in her.

The chief alteration in the military navy, following the Con-

quest, was the gradual introduction of the cargo-ship into the

fighting squadrons instead of leaving battles to be fought out,

as before, between the long ships. The introduction of the

sailing ship of high freeboard was the knell of the rowing ship,

which was also racially distasteful to men of Northern origin

when they were called upon to do the work of slaves for pay

instead of plunder. Galley could board galley, but could hardly

board the loftier sailing vessel which, before it carried artillery,

it could at most try to ram and sink while exposed to a plunging

fire : added to this, events tended more and more to send fleets

or ships to sea in winter, a duty for which the galley was utterly

unfit, while the fighting proportion of the crews grew too large

for the limited space afforded by a rowing vessel. There-

fore, after the reign of Edward I, galleys fell steadily out of

use until, by the end of the fourteenth century, they had dis-

appeared except for special purposes. Often the number of men

in the crew of a galley of this period shows that it must have

depended chiefly on sail-power, although the name remained,

as it remained as late as the eighteenth century, to describe

a particular build capable of using sweeps on occasion. More-

over, English sovereigns often lessened their expenses by

allowing merchants to hire men-of-war in time of peace, a usual

proceeding down to the reign of Elizabeth, and no sane merchant

would freight a galley unless expense was no object.

166

SHIPPING

By the reign of John cogs and 'great ships' were in use, besides many others doubtless presenting only variations in size or detail. The barge, a favourite Norman build, being the enlarged Viking long ship, sometimes with two decks, using oar and sail, and brought over by the Conqueror, was adopted here and was probably the model of the semi-fighting, semi-cargo ship which, under various names, made up the bulk of the fighting fleets. There was no accurate method of measuring tonnage, which was simply calculated by the number of tuns of Bordeaux wine a ship carried when laden, but by 1214 ships of 80 and 100 of such tuns were not uncommon, and, in the reign of Edward III, of 200 tons and upwards. A ship found in 1823 in an old channel of the river Rother at the west end of the Isle of Oxney, buried in nineteen feet of deposit, belongs perhaps to this period. Apparently a merchantman, she was assigned by the antiquaries of 1823 to the reign of Edward I, and is supposed to have been lost in the great storm of 1287, when old Winchelsea was destroyed and the course of the Rother changed. She was built of oak and single-masted, round-bowed and flat-floored with no keel, and had one cabin forward and two aft. That she was open amidships when found does not prove that no deck, either permanent or temporary, originally existed. She was caulked with moss, which points to great antiquity, and her boats, of which the remains were found near, were caulked with hair. Altogether, except in her greater depth, she resembles the modern Thames barge which, with the Newcastle 'keel,' is probably a survival of Plantagenet shipping. The rigging of these vessels was simpler than that of to-day, because they had only one mast with one square sail, but the names and things in use were much the same. Forestays and mainstays took the place of shrouds which, with rattlins, were brought into use in the fourteenth century, the modern backstay dating from the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century. The yard was fitted with braces, and the sail, usually coloured and sometimes decorated with armorial bearings, had brails and reefs, while additional canvas was provided in the shape of one or more bonnets which laced on to the foot of the sail. The hull was painted red or other

PLATE LXII.

1. Ship of 15th cent. (Life of Rich., E. of Warwick ; Coll. MS. Julius, E. iv.)

2-7. Illustrations, from various original sources, showing the evolution of the forecastle through 400 years.

8. Dry Dock.

Aymard Barnard delt

WILLIAM I TO HENRY V

167

colours, and was sometimes ornamented with heraldic badges or

designs in gilt. Sheets, cranelines and bowlines, trusses, collars,

racks, davits, halliards, boltropes, seizings, hawsers, shivers,

pulleys, spikes (handspikes), ribands, hatches, foothooks, buoys,

and windlasses, are all words and things in use now. Some form

of pump or baler ('wynding-balie'), worked by means of the

windlass, was used to free the ship of water; the bowsprit did

not come into use until the fifteenth century, but is sometimes

seen in a rudimentary form with the forestay made fast to it.

The modern rudder was introduced towards the end of the

thirteenth century; it appears in an English MS. of about 1300,

and on the seal of the town of Damme of 1309. From the fact

that it is shown in Northern MSS., seals, and coins earlier than

in those of South French or Italian provenance, it may be

presumed to be a Northern, perhaps a Flemish, invention.

If we may judge of the appearance of ships from the illuminations

in MSS., the high Norman stem and stern posts were still

in use during the greater part of the period under consideration.

The necessities of warfare, the need for more space and a

position of greater advantage than the deck, led to the introduction

of 'castles,' temporary structures of wood in the bow and

stern, which could be put in place during a cruise and afterwards

removed. A fighting-top was also slung or fixed at some

point along the mast. The gradual evolution of the temporary

castle into the later forecastle and poop can be followed with

sufficient precision from the MSS. available [Pl. LXII, 2–7].

At first we have a skeleton structure of beams, lashed to the

stem and gunwale, supporting a lofty platform; then the stem

is bent outwards and the platform lowered and brought over it;

next the platform becomes a permanent part of the projecting

stem which is widened out into a geometrical shape—square or

pentagonal—and juts out far beyond the cutwater. As this

would make the ship pitch heavily and take water on board in

tons, a further step was either to lengthen the keel and body

of the hull to bring it under the forecastle, or to bring this in

board. Both processes, but chiefly the latter, operated to effect

the change towards the modern type, leaving the beakhead of

the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries as a survival

168

SHIPPING

of the obsolete Norman prow. The development of the poop

was more direct, since it was brought altogether onboard at an

earlier date. To fill in the body of the forecastle and poop with

cabins, afterwards to increase the number of these cabins by

having two or three decks of them in the structures fore and

aft, was a natural proceeding as crews increased and voyages

became longer.

4. Medieval Warfare, Tactics, and Organization.

Among the Mediterranean sea-powers treatises on tactics

and the art of naval warfare had been in use for centuries,

but in the North methods of fighting were still primitive.

Owing to the limited range of offensive weapons the object

of commanders was to come to hand-grips without delay.