The Crusades are admitted by all modern writers to have given shape to
heraldry. And although we cannot give credit to many of the traditions
relating to the acquisition of armorial bearings by valorous knights on
the plains of Palestine, yet there is no doubt that many of our commonest
charges, such as the crescent, the escallop-shell, the water-bowget, &c.,
are derived from those chivalric scenes. Salverte observes that "the
ensigns which adorned the banner of a knight had not, in earlier times,
been adopted by his son, jealous of honouring, in its turn, the emblem
which he himself had chosen. But this glorious portion of the heritage of
a father or a brother who had died fighting for the cross was seized with
avidity by his successor on the fields of Palestine; for, in changing the
paternal banner, he would have feared that he should not be recognized by
his own vassals and his rivals in glory. History expressly tells us that,
at this epoch, many of the chiefs of the crusaders rendered the symbols
which they bore peculiar to their own house."[42] Dallaway, with his
accustomed elegance, remarks, "Those chiefs who, during the holy war,
returned to their own country, were industrious to call forth the highest
admiration of their martial exploits in the middle ranks. Ambitious of
displaying the banners they had borne in the sacred field, they procured
every external embellishment that could render them either more beautiful
as to the execution of the armorial designs, or more venerable as objects
of such perilous attainment. The bannerols of this era were usually of
silk stuffs, upon which was embroidered the device; and the shields of
metal, enamelled in colours, and diapered or diversified with flourishes
of gold and silver. Both the arts of encaustic painting and embroidery
were then well known and practised, yet of so great cost as to be procured
only by the most noble and wealthy. Amongst other pageantries was the
dedication of these trophies to some propitiatory Saint, over whose shrine
they were suspended, and which introduced armorial bearings in the
decoration of churches, frequently carved in stone, painted in fresco upon
the walls, or stained in glass in the windows. The avarice of the
ecclesiastics in thus adding to their treasures conduced almost as much as
the military genius of the age to the more general introduction of arms.
So sanctioned, the use of them became indispensable."[43]
By the time of Edward the First we find that all great commanders had
adopted arms, which were at that date really _coats_; the tinctures and
charges of the banner and shield being applied to the surcoat, or mantle,
which was worn over the armour, while the trappings of horses were
decorated in a similar manner.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account