Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive.) THE CURIOSITIES OF HERALDRY. WITH Illustrations from Old English Writers. BY MARK ANTONY LOWER, AUTHOR OF "ENGLISH SURNAMES," ETC. WITH NUMEROUS WOOD ENGRAVINGS, From Designs by the Author. LONDON: JOHN RUSSELL SMITH, 4, OLD COMPTON STREET, SOHO. MDCCCXLV. C. AND J. ADLARD, PRINTERS, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. PREFACE. [Illustration] Little need be said to the lover of antiquity in commendation of the subject of this volume; and I take it for granted that every one who reads the history of the Middle Ages in a right spirit will readily acknowledge that Heraldry, as a system, is by no means so contemptible a thing as the mere utilitarian considers it to be. Yet, notwithstanding, how few are there who have even a partial acquaintance with its principles. To how many, even of those who find pleasure in archæological pursuits, does the charge apply: "--_neque enim clypei cælamina norit_." Two hundred years ago, when the study of armory was much more cultivated than at present, this general ignorance of our 'noble science' called forth the censure of its admirers. Master Ri. Brathwait, lamenting it, says of some of his contemporaries: "They weare theire grandsire's signet on their thumb, Yet aske them whence their crest is, they are _mum_;" and adds: "Who weare gay _coats_, but can no _coat_ deblaze, Display'd for _gulls_, may bear _gules_ in their face!"[1] This invective is perhaps a little too severe, yet it is mildness itself when compared with that of Ranulphus Holme, son of the author of the 'Academy of Armory,' who declares that unless the reader assents to what is contained in his father's book he is "neither Art's nor Learning's friend, But an ignorant, empty, brainless sot, Whose chiefest study is the _can_ and _pot_!" Now, though I would by no means place the objector to Heraldry upon the same bench with the devotee of Bacchus, nor even upon the stool of the dunce, yet I hope to make it appear that the study is worthy of more attention than is generally conceded to it.[2] At the same time I wish it to be distinctly understood that I do not over-rate its importance. "The benefit arising from different pursuits will differ, of course, in degree, but nothing that exercises the intellect can be useless, and in this spirit it may be possible to study even conchology without degradation."