In heraldry, murrey is a "stain", i. e. A non-standard tincture, a dark reddish purple colour, it is distinct therefrom. According to dictionaries, "murrey" is the colour of mulberries, being somewhere between the heraldic tinctures of gules and purpure, maroon; the livery colours of the House of York in England in the fifteenth century were azure and murrey, as depicted on the shields of the Falcon of the Plantagenets and the White Lion of Mortimer, which are 2 of the Queen's Beasts. Mulberry Purple Purpure Sanguigne Stain Tenné Tincture Media related to Murrey at Wikimedia Commons
Coat of arms
A coat of arms is a heraldic visual design on an escutcheon, surcoat, or tabard. The coat of arms on an escutcheon forms the central element of the full heraldic achievement which in its whole consists of shield, supporters and motto. A coat of arms is traditionally unique to an individual person, state, organization or corporation; the Roll of Arms is a collection of many coats of arms, since the early Modern Age centuries it has been a source of information for public showing and tracing the membership of a noble family, therefore its genealogy across time. The ancient Greek hoplites used individual insignia on their shields; the ancient Romans used similar insignia on their shields. Heraldic designs came into general use among western nobility in the 12th century. Systematic, heritable heraldry had developed by the beginning of the 13th century. Who had a right to use arms, by law or social convention, varied to some degree between countries. Early heraldic designs were personal. Arms become hereditary by the end of the 12th century, in England by King Richard I during the Third Crusade.
Burgher arms are used in Northern Italy in the second half of the 13th century, in the Holy Roman Empire by the mid 14th century. In the late medieval period, use of arms spread to the clergy, to towns as civic identifiers, to royally chartered organizations such as universities and trading companies; the arts of vexillology and heraldry are related. The term coat of arms itself in origin refers to the surcoat with heraldic designs worn by combattants in the knightly tournament, in Old French cote a armer; the sense is transferred to the heraldic design itself in the mid-14th century. Despite no widespread regulation, heraldry has remained consistent across Europe, where tradition alone has governed the design and use of arms; some nations, like England and Scotland, still maintain the same heraldic authorities which have traditionally granted and regulated arms for centuries and continue to do so in the present day. In England, for example, the granting of arms has been controlled by the College of Arms.
Unlike seals and other general emblems, heraldic "achievements" have a formal description called a blazon, which uses vocabulary that allows for consistency in heraldic depictions. In the present day, coats of arms are still in use by a variety of institutions and individuals: for example, many European cities and universities have guidelines on how their coats of arms may be used, protect their use as trademarks. Many societies exist that aid in the design and registration of personal arms. Heraldry has been compared to modern corporate logos; the French system of heraldry influenced the British and Western European systems. Much of the terminology and classifications are taken from it. However, with the fall of the French monarchy there is not a Fons Honorum to enforce heraldic law; the French Republics that followed have either affirmed pre-existing titles and honors or vigorously opposed noble privilege. Coats of arms are considered an intellectual property of municipal body. Assumed arms are considered valid unless they can be proved in court to copy that of an earlier holder.
In the heraldic traditions of England and Scotland, an individual, rather than a family, had a coat of arms. In those traditions coats of arms are legal property transmitted from father to son. Undifferenced arms are used only by one person at any given time. Other descendants of the original bearer could bear the ancestral arms only with some difference: a colour change or the addition of a distinguishing charge. One such charge is the label, which in British usage is now always the mark of an heir apparent or an heir presumptive; because of their importance in identification in seals on legal documents, the use of arms was regulated. This has been carried out by heralds and the study of coats of arms is therefore called "heraldry". In time, the use of arms spread from military entities to educational institutes, other establishments. In Scotland, the Lord Lyon King of Arms has criminal jurisdiction to control the use of arms. In England, Northern Ireland and Wales the use of arms is a matter of civil law and regulated by the College of Arms and the High Court of Chivalry.
In reference to a dispute over the exercise of authority over the Officers of Arms in England, Arthur Annesley, 1st Earl of Anglesey, Lord Privy Seal, declared on 16 June 1673 that the powers of the Earl Marshal were "to order and determine all matters touching arms, ensigns of nobility and chivalry. It was further declared that no patents of arms or any ensigns of nobility should be granted and no augmentation, alteration, or addition should be made to arms without the consent of the Earl Marshal. In Ireland the usage and granting of coats of arms was regulated by the Ulster King of Arms from the office's creation in 1552. After Irish independence in 1922 the office was still working out of Dublin Castle; the last Ulster King of Arm
Polish heraldry refers to the study of coats of arms in the lands of historical Poland. It focuses on Polish traits of heraldry; the term is used to refer to the Polish heraldic system, as opposed to systems used elsewhere, notably in Western Europe. As such, it is an integral part of the history of the nobility of Poland. Due to the distinct manner in which feudal society evolved, the heraldic traditions of Poland differ from those in German lands, France or the British Isles. Unlike Western Europe, in Poland, the szlachta did not emerge from the feudal class of knights but stemmed in great part from earlier Slavic local rulers and free warriors and mercenaries. Rulers hired these free warriors and mercenaries to form military units and in the 11th century during the time of Casimir I the Restorer with the development of feudalism, armies paid by the Prince were replaced by knights that were paid in land. Much written evidence from the Middle Ages demonstrates how some elements of the Polish nobility did emerge from former Slavic rulers that were included in the ranks of the knightly class under the terms of the chivalric law and iure polonico.
Because Polish clans have different origins, only part of the szlachta can be traced all the way back to the traditional old clan system based on kinship. The clans that could show kinship belonged to a House, such as the House of Odrowąż; when different Houses created different surnames for each property, the House turned into the Clan Odrowąż. Other szlachta were not related and their unions were voluntary and based on fellowship and brotherhood rather than kinship, still being full members of the Clan, creating Clan politics like in Clan Ostoja or Clan Abdank, but forming a heraldic clan. Near the end of the history of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, due to adoptions and other circumstances, all Clans in Poland turned into Heraldic Clans. In the year 1244, Bolesław, Duke of Masovia, identified members of the knights' clan as members of a genealogia: "I received my good servitors from the land of Poland, from the clan called Jelito, with my well-disposed knowledge and the cry, the godło, I established them in the said land of mine, Masovia."
The documentation regarding Raciborz and Albert's tenure is the earliest surviving of the use of the clan name and cry defining the honorable status of Polish knights. The names of knightly genealogiae only came to be associated with heraldic devices in the Middle Ages and in the early modern period; the Polish clan name and cry ritualized the ius militare. According to Polish historian Tadeusz Manteuffel, a Polish clan consisted of people related by blood and descending from a common ancestor, giving the ród/clan a developed sense of solidarity; the starosta had judicial and military power over the ród/clan, although this power was exercised with an assembly of elders. Strongholds called gród were built where a unifying religious cult was powerful, where trials were conducted, where clans gathered in the face of danger; the opole was the territory occupied by a single tribe. Such clans used signs that during 13th century become Coat of Arms of the House or the Clan; the origin of those proto-CoAs is controversial.
Some, like Sulimirski, claim Sarmatian origin and some like Piekosiński claim that those signs are Runes of dynastic tribal rulers. Heraldic symbols began to be used in Poland in the 13th century; the generic Polish term for a coat of arms, was used for the first time in the year 1415 at the Royal Office with text et quatuor herbis, originating as a translation of the Czech erb, which in turn came from the German Erbe - heritage. During the Union of Horodło, 47 Prince and Boyar families of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were adopted into 47 Polish noble clans and began to use Polish coats of arms. Since there was no heraldic authority in Poland or in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, many old Polish coats of arms were changed over time by different publications, losing their original appearance; the Heraldic Commission was registered on 20 January 2010. Although many medieval Polish coats of arms were presented in Western European rolls of arms, there were no publications that presented original coats of arms in Poland until the 20th century, when Adam Heymowski began recovering old Polish coats of arms.
His work was continued by Professor Józef Szymański, who published an armorial of original Polish coats of arms. The ancient Pałuki family coat of arms was visually close to the Topór coat of arms, in time a similar coat was assumed by Clan Topór; as the Ostoja coat of arms evolved, the dragon was replaced by feathers and the cross by the sword, followed by other changes between ancient and modern versions. Many Polish coats of arms feature so-called variations. In many cases, variations are simple errors, sometimes the family wished to make a distinction within the clan and in other cases coats have been called variations of a particular family's coat just because they look similar, which all together create a unique heraldic clan organisation in Poland; this is presented in the second part of the gallery, which shows many different variations of the Ostoja coat of arms. None of the variations above have anything in common with Ostoja, they just look similar
A Standesscheibe is a stained glass that presents a coat of arms of a canton of the Old Swiss Confederacy. It is sometimes arranged in a complete armorial of all cantonal coats of arms of Switzerland. A standessheibe is an example of a coat of arms depicted in a stained glass window; the usage of Standessheibe became fashionable in 1485 along with the Swiss illustrated chronicles. This was as a result of increased national pride due to recent victories in the Burgundian Wars. In 1501, a full set of cantonal Standesscheiben, made by Lukas Zeiner of Zürich, was presented to the hall of the Swiss diet in Baden. Standesscheiben usage remained active in Switzerland throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, to some extent continued in the 19th and early 20th centuries with the coats of arms of the cantons of modern Switzerland. Cantonal coats of arms Hermann Meyer, Die schweizerische Sitte der Fenster- und Wappenschenkung vom XV. bis XVII. Jh.. Jenny Schneider, Die Standesscheiben von Lukas Zeiner im Tagsatzungssaal zu Baden: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der schweizerischen Standesscheiben, vol. 12 of Basler Studien zur Kunstgeschichte
Royal Arms of England
The Royal Arms of England are the arms first adopted in a fixed form at the start of the age of heraldry as personal arms by the Plantagenet kings who ruled England from 1154. In the popular mind they have come to symbolise the nation of England, although according to heraldic usage nations do not bear arms, only persons and corporations do; the blazon of the Arms of Plantagenet is: Gules, three lions passant guardant in pale or armed and langued azure, signifying three identical gold lions with blue tongues and claws, walking past but facing the observer, arranged in a column on a red background. Although the tincture azure of tongue and claws is not cited in many blazons, they are a distinguishing feature of the Arms of England; this coat, designed in the High Middle Ages, has been variously combined with those of the Kings of France, Scotland, a symbol of Ireland, the House of Nassau and the Kingdom of Hanover, according to dynastic and other political changes occurring in England, but has not altered since it took a fixed form in the reign of Richard I, the second Plantagenet king.
Although in England the official blazon refers to "lions", French heralds used the term "leopard" to represent the lion passant guardant, hence the arms of England, no doubt, are more blazoned, "leopards". Without doubt the same animal was intended, but different names were given according to the position. Royal emblems depicting lions were first used by Danish Vikings and Normans. With Plantagenets a formal and consistent English heraldry system emerged at the end of the 12th century; the earliest surviving representation of an escutcheon, or shield, displaying three lions is that on the Great Seal of King Richard I, which displayed one or two lions rampant, but in 1198 was permanently altered to depict three lions passant representing Richard I's principal three positions as King of the English, Duke of the Normans, Duke of the Aquitanians. In 1340, Edward III laid claim to the throne of France, thus adopted the Royal arms of France which he quartered with his paternal arms, the Royal Arms of England.
He placed the French arms in the 4th quarters. This quartering was adjusted and restored intermittently throughout the Middle Ages as the relationship between England and France changed; when the French king altered his arms from semée of fleur-de-lys, to only three, the English quartering followed suit. After the Union of the Crowns in 1603, when the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland entered a personal union, the arms of England and Scotland were marshalled in what has now become the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom, it appears in a similar capacity to represent England in the Arms of Canada and on the Queen's Personal Canadian Flag. The coat of three lions continues to represent England on several coins of the pound sterling, forms the basis of several emblems of English national sports teams and endures as one of the most recognisable national symbols of England; when the Royal Arms are in the format of an heraldic flag, it is variously known as the Royal Banner of England, the Banner of the Royal Arms, the Banner of the King of England, or by the misnomer the Royal Standard of England.
This Royal Banner differs from England's national flag, the St George's Cross, in that it does not represent any particular area or land, but rather symbolises the sovereignty vested in the rulers thereof. The first documented use of royal arms dates from the reign of Richard I. Much antiquarians would retrospectively invented attributed arms for earlier kings, but their reigns pre-dated the systematisation of hereditary English heraldry that only occurred in the second half of the 12th century. Lions may have been used as a badge by members of the Norman dynasty: a late-12th century chronicler reports that in 1128, Henry I of England knighted his son-in-law, Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou, gave him a gold lion badge; the memorial enamel created to decorate Geoffrey's tomb depicts a blue coat of arms bearing gold lions. His son, Henry II used a lion as his emblem, based on the arms used by his sons and other relatives, he may have used a coat of arms with a single lion or two lions, though no direct testimony of this has been found.
His children experimented with different combinations of lions on their arms. Richard I used a single lion rampant, or two lions affrontés, on his first seal, but used three lions passant in his 1198 Great Seal of England, thus established the lasting design of the Royal Arms of England. In 1177, his brother John had used a seal depicting a shield with two lions passant guardant, but when he succeeded his brother on the English throne he would adopt arms with three lions passant or on a field gules, these were used, unchanged, as the royal arms by him and his successors until 1340. In 1340, following the extinction of the House of Capet, Edward III claimed the French throne. In addition to initiating the Hundred Years' War, Edward III expressed his claim in heraldic form by quartering the royal arms of England with the Arms of France; this quartering continued until 1801, with intervals in 1360–1369 and 1420–1422. Following the death of Elizabeth I in 1603, the throne of England was inherited by the Scottish House of Stuart, resulting in the Union of the Crowns: the Kingdom of England and Kingdom of Scotland wer
Hatchings are distinctive and systematic patterns of lines and dots used for designating heraldic tinctures or other colours on uncoloured surfaces, such as woodcuts or engravings and coins. Several systems of hatchings were developed during the Renaissance as an alternative to tricking, the earlier method of indicating heraldic tinctures by use of written abbreviations; the present day hatching system was developed during the 1630s by Silvester Petra Sancta and Marcus Vulson de la Colombière. Some earlier hatching methods were developed, but did not come into wide use. Hatching developed. For copperplate engravers and artists such as Zangrius and Franquart, it served as a natural method to designate heraldic tinctures. Copper plate engravers faced difficulties producing coloured illustrations; the first tests of colour copperplate engravings were done by François Perrier around the middle of the 17th century. According to some views, multi-coloured copperplate engravings were invented by Abraham Bosse, as described in his 1645 treatise.
Heralds did not like hatching, the College of Arms gave preference to tricking beyond the 17th century. Tricking was a quicker way than hatching to designate the tinctures. Otto Titan von Hefner maintained that the first traces of hatching on the woodcuts began during the 15th and 16th centuries. Both tricking and hatching were applied by the Benedictine monk and historian Vincenzo Borghini, he drew a difference between metals and colours of arms on his woodcuts by leaving the places for metals blank. Besides this, tinctures were designated in the fields and on the ordinaries and charges by tricking: R for rosso, A for azure, N for nigro, G for gialbo, B for biancho. Vert was not represent among his works. Painting and graphics advanced in the Low Countries during the 15-18th centuries. For this reason, different hatching methods emerged in the system of heraldry in these territories, such as the methods of Zangrius, Butkens, de Rouck; the four other authors to produce hatching systems in the 17th century – de la Colombière, Petra Sancta and Lobkowitz – had close connection with heraldists and artists in these territories.
The earliest hatching system was developed by Jan Baptist Zangrius, a copperplate engraver, publisher and bookseller from Leuven, in 1600. The hatching systems of Petra Sancta and de la Colombière differed from Zangrius's method only in their hatchings of the colour Sable; the primacy of developing a hatching method belongs undoubtedly to Zangrius. In comparison to his system, Petra Sancta and de la Colombière made only minor changes to Zangrius‘ system such as different hatching for the colour Sable, it seems that de la Colombière preceded Petra Sancta and the armorial chart of Zangrius published in French could be known to him pretty well. The artists from the Spanish Low Countries, to say from the neighbouring territories to France, visited Paris often. We have only some fragmental data about the life of Marcus Vulson de la Colombière, he visited Paris in 1618, but by all probability, until 1635 he was staying in Grenoble as he was a royal counselor in the Dauphiné parliament. He published a book in the spirit of the Gallicanism in Geneva that year.
Colombière’s ideas suited the king’s taste too, as a result he departed Grenoble and settled in Paris, where he devoted his entire energy to study heraldry. His next book was published in Paris in 1638, he had wide-ranging correspondence with the most renowned heraldists of his time. For this reason, it could be concluded that de la Colombière was right in claiming the title of the inventor of the hatching system, accusing Petra Sancta of copying his method and incorrectly publishing it in his 1638 work, one year before the same hatching system was published by de la Colombière. However, the earlier book of Petra Sancta from 1634 had a hatching table as well. On page 37 of his title La Science Heroїque, Colombière maintains that Petra Sancta copied his system without any changes. De la Colombière mentions the book publishers and copperplate engravers as the users of the hatching system. Ottfried Neubecker maintains that the hatching system in heraldry was invented by de la Colombière and not Petra Sancta who only popularized the system through his second treatise titled Tesserae gentilitia, published in 1638.
On the other hand, it’s true that Silvester Petra Sancta provided though preliminary, comprehensive studies on his heraldic work in Germany and the Netherlands and that it’s likely that he was acquainted with the idea of hatching and the earlier existing hatching methods from the Dutch engravers before he developed his own hatching system. He was the confessor of the Cardinal Pier Luigi Carafa. Between 1624 and 1634, Petra Sancta stayed with his lord in Cologne where he fought against the rising Protestantism through his sermons and religious discussions, including through two of his emblematic books published in 1634 and 1638, respectively, he settled down in Rome and published his famous treatise on heraldry there, but during the late 1620s and the early 1630s he stayed in the Spanish Low Countries and the neighbouring territories. In 1634 he published his first book touching the topic of heraldry, containing a hatching table, hi
Matthew Paris, known as Matthew of Paris, was a Benedictine monk, English chronicler, artist in illuminated manuscripts and cartographer, based at St Albans Abbey in Hertfordshire. He wrote a number of works historical, which he scribed and illuminated himself in drawings coloured with watercolour washes, sometimes called "tinted drawings"; some were written in some in Anglo-Norman or French verse. His Chronica Majora is an oft-cited source, though modern historians recognise that Paris was not always reliable, he tended to denigrate the Pope. However, in his Historia Anglorum, Paris displays a negative view of Frederick, going as far as to describe him as a "tyrant" who "committed disgraceful crimes". In spite of his surname and knowledge of the French language, Paris was of English birth, is believed by some chroniclers to be of the Paris family of Hildersham, Cambridgeshire, he may have studied at Paris in his youth after early education at St Albans School. The first we know of Matthew Paris is that he was admitted as a monk to St Albans in 1217.
It is on the assumption. He was at ease with the nobility and royalty, which may indicate that he came from a family of some status, although it seems an indication of his personality, his life was spent in this religious house. In 1248, Paris was sent to Norway as the bearer of a message from Louis IX to Haakon IV. Apart from these missions, his known activities were devoted to the composition of history, a pursuit for which the monks of St Albans had long been famous. After admission to the order in 1217, he inherited the mantle of Roger of Wendover, the abbey's official recorder of events, in 1236. Paris revised Roger's work; this Chronica Majora is an important historical source document for the period between 1235 and 1259. Interesting are the illustrations Paris created for his work; the Dublin MS contains interesting notes, which shed light on Paris' involvement in other manuscripts, on the way his own were used. They are in French and in his handwriting: "If you please you can keep this book till Easter" "G, please send to the Lady Countess of Arundel, that she is to send you the book about St Thomas the Martyr and St Edward which I copied and illustrated, which the Lady Countess of Cornwall may keep until Whitsuntide" some verses "In the Countess of Winchester's book let there be a pair of images on each page thus": It is presumed the last relates to Paris acting as commissioning agent and iconographical consultant for the Countess with another artist.
The lending of his manuscripts to aristocratic households for periods of weeks or months at a time, suggests why he made several different illustrated versions of his Chronicle. Paris' manuscripts contain more than one text, begin with a rather random assortment of prefatory full-page miniatures; some have survived incomplete, the various elements now bound together may not have been intended to be so by Paris. Unless stated otherwise, all were given by Paris to his monastery; the monastic libraries were broken up at the Dissolution. These MS seem to have been appreciated, were collected by bibliophiles. Many of his manuscripts in the British Library are from the Cotton Library. Chronica Majora. Corpus Christi College, Mss 26 and 16, 362 x 244/248 mm. ff 141 + 281, composed 1240–53. His major historical work, but less illustrated per page than others; these two volumes contain annals from the creation of the world up to the year 1253. The content up to 1234 or 1235 is based in the main on Roger of Wendover's Flores Historiarum, with additions.
There are 100 marginal drawings, some fragmentary maps and an itinerary, full-page drawings of William I and the Elephant with Keeper. MS 16 has recently had all prefatory matter re-bound separately. A continuation of the Chronica, from 1254 until Paris' death in 1259, is bound with the Historia Anglorum in the British Library volume below. An unillustrated copy of the material from 1189 to 1250, with much of his sharper commentary about Henry III toned down or removed, was supervised by Paris himself and now exists as British Library Cotton MS Nero D V, fol. 162–393. Flores Historiarum. Chetham's Hospital and Library, Manchester, MS 6712. Only part of the text, covering 1241 to 1249, is in Paris' hand, though he is credited with the authorship of the whole text, an abridgement of the Chronica with additions from the annals of Reading and of Southwark. Additional interpolations to the text make it clear, it was started there, copying another MS of Paris' text that went up to 1240. It was sent back to the author for him to update.
The illustrations are similar to Paris' style but not by him. Additions took the chronicle up to 1327. Historia Anglorum. British Library, Royal MS 14 C VII, fols. 8v–156v. 358 x 250 mm, ff 232 in all. A