ARMS AND THE BARD

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26129, 3 June 1950, Page 3

ARMS AND THE BARD

Shakespeare’s Heraldry. Illustrated by the Author. By C. W. Scott-Giles. Dent. 237 pp.

That Henry VIII was deteilnined to marry Anne Boleyn speaks well for his taste and morals, but that he faked her quarterings shows him up as rather a snob. Why did the King of England suppress on a coat of arms the paternity of one of his wives? Mr Scott-Giles gives the answer to this and many other questions in his fascinating volume of Shakespearean heraldry. Heraldry had arisen in the twelfth century as a utilitarian device. distinguishing combatants on the field of battle. The early marks used were simple, as can be seen from the illustrations given in this book. By the time of Henry VIII, heraldic devices had degenerated into flambuoyance and shields of arms became pictorial pedigrees, proclaiming the pride of race of their hearers. Henry was human enough to covet the accomplished Anne Boleyn, but too snobbish to marry her until he had made her a countess and invented for her an illustrious ancestry whose arms were quartered on her shield. The development of heraldry which made Henry stoop to such subterfuges is given by Mr Scott-Giles in his introductory chapters. In the earlier centuries. heraldic shields and banners were of use only to persons who held land by military tenure and led their own units in the feudal army. This practice, as the author points out. led to the conception that only the gentry had a right to heraldic “arms. Dispensations might be given,, for example, by Henry V. who proclaimed after Agincourt that all who had fought in the battle might assume arms. Heraldic devices were now regarded as a mark of distinction, and as their use on the battlefield declined with the disappearance of heavy cavalry consisting of nobles, they camfi to be used in the end as ornaments and no longer as signs of recognition. At the same time, the association of heraldry with gentility was strengthened. By the Tudor period it had hardened into the rule that only persons possessing arms could rank as gentlemen.

Shakespeare’s family had come to possess the means of gentlefolk, but had not yet the right to display grms. Shakespeare’s father applied for a grant of arms from the Tudor heralds, and after being kept waiting for many years finally obtained the right to displav arms both for himself and his wife in her own right. Facsimiles of the documents are given in this book. Mr Scott-Giles surmises that the intervention bv William finally secured the desirable mark of distinction to his father. The evidence is circumstantial, and some of it is drawn from the preoccupation shown bv Shakespeare with heraldrv in the plays dating from the time when be must have used his influence on his father’s behalf. Shakespeare, however. made heraldic allusions throughout his rlays. At. that particular period, he used them more pointedly. From Shakespeare's heraldic imagery, Mr Scott-Giles can draw other interesting deductions. Shakespeare had a good knowledge of the heraldic devices used by the more important historical characters appearing in his plays. Of others, with one exception, he knew no more than any educated man of his time who saw them displayed on all occasions of pageantry. The exception lies in the case of Warwickshire, his home county. His knowledge of Warwickshire heraldry was greater than that of other counties. Baconians will note with asperity that their choice of author for the Shakespearean plays was a mere Londoner. and inferential evidence from knowledge of heraldry points once again to a Warwickshire man—to Shakespeare himself as the author of the works connected with his name. Contentious issues crop up again in the later sections of the book in which Mr Scott-Giles assigns the correct coat of arms to each historical character appearing in the plays, and appropriate arms to a Falstaff and Sir Toby Belch. The learning of the author in heraldry is immense, and his ingenuity in tracing the branch of the family to which the personages in the plays belonged, and assigning the proper devices, is a pretty piece of reasoning. The blazons of each particular coat of arms have been specially drawn by Mr Scott-Giles for his book. They will prove of great value to producers who can now have no longer any excuse for committing heraldic faux-pas on the stage. Apart from such utilitarian considerations in which lay. after all, the origin of heraldry, the illustrations of the coats of arms, of badges, banners, marks of cadency, crests, shields, and supporters, make of “Shakespeare’s Heraldry” a picture-book of great charm that will be appreciated for its beauty and its interesting text. Producers of Shakespeare will find it indispensable.