First quarter of shield

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Clagett, Brice

First quarter of shield

Legg inn av Clagett, Brice » 09 nov 2005 01:16:01

Of the 89 coats of arms depicted in W.H. St. John Hope's _The
Stall Plates of the Knights of the Order of the Garter 1348-1485_
(1905), no fewer than eleven have something other than the
paternal arms in the first quarter:

Sir William Willoughby, Lord Willoughby de Eresby (Ufford in
first quarter)

Sir Hugh Burnell, Lord Burnell (Botetourt in first quarter)

Sir John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk (d. 1432) (sole arms:
England with a silver label)

Sir Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury (Montagu quartering
Monthermer in first quarter)

Sir William Neville, Lord Fauconberg (Fauconberg in first
quarter)

Sir Thomas Stanley, Lord Stanley (Lathom quartering Stanley
in first quarter)

Sir John Neville, Lord Montagu (Montagu quartering Monthermer
in first quarter)

Sir John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, d. 1476 (sole arms: England
with a silver label)

Sir Walter Blount, Lord Mountjoy (Ayala in first quarter)

Sir Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham (France modern
quartering England with a silver bordure)

Frederick, Duke of Urbino (black eagle of the Empire in first
quarter).

Under the Duke of Buckingham Hope quotes a ruling by the
College of Arms in 13 E.4 that "where a nobleman is descended
lenyalle Ineritable to iii or iv Cotes and afterward is ascended
to a Cotte neire to the King and of his royall blood may for his
most onneur bere the same Cootte alone And no lower Coottes
of Dignite to be quartered therewith."

Gjest

Re: First quarter of shield

Legg inn av Gjest » 09 nov 2005 08:22:45

"Clagett, Brice" schrieb:

Of the 89 coats of arms depicted in W.H. St. John Hope's _The
Stall Plates of the Knights of the Order of the Garter 1348-1485_
(1905), no fewer than eleven have something other than the
paternal arms in the first quarter:

Under the Duke of Buckingham Hope quotes a ruling by the
College of Arms in 13 E.4 that "where a nobleman is descended
lenyalle Ineritable to iii or iv Cotes and afterward is ascended
to a Cotte neire to the King and of his royall blood may for his
most onneur bere the same Cootte alone And no lower Coottes
of Dignite to be quartered therewith."

Bingo! Thanks Brice.

MAR

Tim Powys-Lybbe

Re: First quarter of shield

Legg inn av Tim Powys-Lybbe » 09 nov 2005 23:20:46

In message of 9 Nov, bclagett@cov.com ("Clagett, Brice") wrote:

Of the 89 coats of arms depicted in W.H. St. John Hope's _The
Stall Plates of the Knights of the Order of the Garter 1348-1485_
(1905), no fewer than eleven have something other than the
paternal arms in the first quarter:

Sir William Willoughby, Lord Willoughby de Eresby (Ufford in
first quarter)

Sir Hugh Burnell, Lord Burnell (Botetourt in first quarter)

Sir John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk (d. 1432) (sole arms:
England with a silver label)

Sir Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury (Montagu quartering
Monthermer in first quarter)

Sir William Neville, Lord Fauconberg (Fauconberg in first
quarter)

Sir Thomas Stanley, Lord Stanley (Lathom quartering Stanley
in first quarter)

Sir John Neville, Lord Montagu (Montagu quartering Monthermer
in first quarter)

Sir John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, d. 1476 (sole arms: England
with a silver label)

Sir Walter Blount, Lord Mountjoy (Ayala in first quarter)

Sir Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham (France modern
quartering England with a silver bordure)

Frederick, Duke of Urbino (black eagle of the Empire in first
quarter).

Under the Duke of Buckingham Hope quotes a ruling by the
College of Arms in 13 E.4 that "where a nobleman is descended
lenyalle Ineritable to iii or iv Cotes and afterward is ascended
to a Cotte neire to the King and of his royall blood may for his
most onneur bere the same Cootte alone And no lower Coottes
of Dignite to be quartered therewith."

Undoubtedly this showed that a minority used quarterings in what we
would now consider the wrong order.

Of these eleven some may have had other reasons for not having their
paternal arms in the top left position:

Burnell: On page 21 Hope wrote: "There still remains to be noticed a
feature observable in certain of the plates of Group I and in those
of Group III, which are in stalls on the Prince's or north side of
the chapel. These all have helms and crests turned to the
sinister, so as to face the high altar; and in cases where the
nature of the charges demanded it, these are also reversed as in
the plates of the Soudan de la Tran and Sir Simon Felbrigge."
Burnell's arms are reversed in this way. It could be that the
quarters were reversed in line with the reversal of everything else.

For both the John Mowbrays we know that the earlier was granted
permission to use the differenced royal arms, if only because a
descendant of his was prosecuted for doing the same in the 16th
century and used this permission as his precedent. In other words
they had changed their personal arms.

For William Nevill lord Fauconberg, Hope's text points out: "In his
seal... the order of the quarterings is reversed." So the jury
remains out on what he was doing!

Henry Stafford is accounted for as above; he too had changed his
personal arms.

Finally the duke of Urbino was not an example of English practice.

This then reduces the number of Englishmen where the personal arms were
not in the top-left (or only) quarter from eleven to five.

Of the other quartered garter arms in this delightful book, I have now
counted sixteen with personal arms in the first position. (There may be
some more but I have only listed, for a separate purpose, the blazons
of 65 of the 87 separate knights.) In other words less than a quarter
of these knights were following rules that did not put the personal
arms in the first position and more than three quarters were following
the now standard rule that the personal arms was put in the first
position. In view of the fact that the heralds were not well
established in those times, I am surprised that the modern rule was
followed by so many, but I think the modern rule developed more
strongly when the whole business of quartering became extended into
that of (many) more than four quarters in an (English) achievement of
arms.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»