Some odd questions
Nessus
assist me with.
I am attempting to interpret a16th century escutcheon that appears in
a play and seems to have been intended as a joke in heraldic language.
It reads, in part;
“between three plates, a chevron engrailed checquy, or, vert, and
ermins;”
Guillim’s 1610 “A Display of Heraldry” says of chevrons:
“This Ordinary is resembled to a paire of Bargecouples or Rafters,
such as Carpenters do set on the highest part of the house, for
bearing of the roofe thereof; and betokeneth the atchieving of some
businesse of moment, or the finishing of some Chargeable and memorable
worke.”
It seems to me, therefore that the plates, being argent roundels,
should represent silver coins, as payment for this work achieved, but
I can find no information about plates to confirm this. Also, am I
correct in assuming that the plates would appear one to each side and
one under the point of the chevron? Or would it be over the point?
I am also confused as to a reason for the engrailment, which Guillim
describes only as part of a class of lines that are, ”crooked.” It
seems possible in context that the author of the escutcheon is using
an extremely esoteric pun to suggest that the work achieved was
dishonest, but it seems a bit of a stretch to me.
Guillim also says that no gentleman lower in rank than an earl could
use multiple rows of ermine. Would that be the case on a chevron in
checquy? It would seem to me that this would have to be considered
multiple rows of ermine in this case, and that this supposed work
would therefore have been achieved for an Earl, since the character in
the play is manifestly not an Earl.
Your opinions would be greatly appreciated.
Nessus
assist me with.
I am attempting to interpret a16th century escutcheon that appears in
a play and seems to have been intended as a joke in heraldic language.
It reads, in part;
“between three plates, a chevron engrailed checquy, or, vert, and
ermins;”
Now, I understand that there are generally no hard and fast meanings
that can be looked up for these devices, but my research has suggested
some contemporary allusions to some of them, particularly Guillim’s
1610 “A Display of Heraldry”, which says of chevrons:
“This Ordinary is resembled to a paire of Bargecouples or Rafters,
such as Carpenters do set on the highest part of the house, for
bearing of the roofe thereof; and betokeneth the atchieving of some
businesse of moment, or the finishing of some Chargeable and memorable
worke.”
It seems to me, therefore that the plates, as argent roundels, should
represent silver coins, as payment for some "Chargeable" work
achieved, but I can find no information about plates to confirm this.
Also, am I correct in assuming that the plates would appear one to
each side and one under the point of the chevron? Or would it be over
the point?
I am also confused as to a reason for the engrailment, which Guillim
describes only as a class of lines that are, ”crooked.” It seems
possible in context that the author of the escutcheon is using an
extremely esoteric canting-style pun to suggest that the work achieved
was dishonest, but it seems a bit of a stretch to me.
Guillim also says that no gentleman lower in rank than an earl could
use multiple rows of ermine. Would that be the case on a chevron in
checquy? It would seem to me that this would have to be considered
multiple rows of ermine in this case, and that this supposed work
should therefore have been achieved for an Earl, since the character
in the play is manifestly not an Earl.
I hope this makes some sense, and your opinions would be greatly
appreciated.
Nessus
when the first post failed to show up for a day.
Madalch
> I have a rather odd series of questions that perhaps you experts can
> assist me with.
>
> I am attempting to interpret a16th century escutcheon that appears in
> a play and seems to have been intended as a joke in heraldic language.
> It reads, in part;
>
> “between three plates, a chevron engrailed checquy, or, vert, and
> ermins;”
I don't see anything humourous about it, actually.
Is there some context?
> Guillim’s 1610 “A Display of Heraldry” says of chevrons:
> “This Ordinary is resembled to a paire of Bargecouples or Rafters,
> such as Carpenters do set on the highest part of the house, for
> bearing of the roofe thereof; and betokeneth the atchieving of some
> businesse of moment, or the finishing of some Chargeable and memorable
> worke.”
That kind of nonsense about each charge betokening a Partickular
Meanynge wasn't taken seriously even in the 1600s.
> Also, am I
> correct in assuming that the plates would appear one to each side and
> one under the point of the chevron?
That's correct.
Nathaniel Taylor
<9368e0ec-071e-4865...@v16g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
Madalch <tres...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > łbetween three plates, a chevron engrailed checquy, or, vert, and
> > ermins;˛
>
> I don't see anything humourous about it, actually.
And I may be missing something obvious, but I can't think how to combine
a metal, a tincture, *and* a fur on the chequy chevron?
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/
Nessus
Humour" by Ben Jonson. The scene regards Sogliardo, who has just
bought himself a coat of arms:
CARLO. But have you arms, have you arms?
SOGLIARDO. I'faith, I thank them; I can write myself gentleman now;
here's my patent, it cost me thirty pound, by this breath.
PUNTARVOLO. A very fair coat, well charged, and full of armory.
SOGLIARDO. Nay, it has as much variety of colours in it, as you have
seen a coat have; how like you the crest, sir?
PUNTARVOLO. I understand it not well, what is't?
SOGLIARDO. Marry, sir, it is your boar without a head, rampant. A boar
without a head, that's very rare!
CARLO. Ay, and rampant too! troth, I commend the herald's wit, he has
decyphered him well: a swine without a head, without brain, wit,
anything indeed, ramping to gentility. You can blazon the rest,
signior, can you not?
SOGLIARDO. O, ay, I have it in writing here of purpose; it cost me two
shilling the tricking.
CARLO. Let's hear, let's hear.
SOGLIARDO [READS.] "Gyrony of eight pieces; azure and gules; between
three plates, a chevron engrailed checquy, or, vert, and ermins; on a
chief argent, between two ann'lets sable, a boar's head, proper."
CARLO. How's that! on a chief argent?
SOGLIARDO [READS.] "On a chief argent, a boar's head proper, between
two ann'lets sable."
CARLO. 'Slud, it's a hog's cheek and puddings in a pewter field,
this.
PUNTARVOLO Let the word be, 'Not without mustard': your crest is very
rare, sir.
Turenne
purchased a coat of arms from a conman. The arms seem so complicated,
even for the early 16th century, that they appear to be catering for
someone with ideas above their station. The piece is almost certainly
an allusion to the fact that Shakespeare had applied to The College of
Arms at about this time for a Grant of Arms.
Richard
Joseph McMillan
> I wonder whether Carlo is laughing at Sogliarto, who it seems has
> purchased a coat of arms from a conman.
Why a conman? There's ample literature from the time, some of it
previously discussed in this group, of ridicule aimed at those who
paid to obtain arms from the official heralds.
>The arms seem so complicated,
> even for the early 16th century, that they appear to be catering for
> someone with ideas above their station. The piece is almost certainly
> an allusion to the fact that Shakespeare had applied to The College of
> Arms at about this time for a Grant of Arms.
Possibly, but "almost certainly" seems an overstatement. Lots of
targets of opportunity around for Jonson to aim at during this
period.
Emungo
This is quite a well known case of heraldic satire in literature.
Sogliardo's arms (in the wrds of Michael J O'Shea, James Joyce and
Heraldry [NY 1986], p 35) are "the heraldic equivalent of a fool's
motley". A good, though old, secondary source on the topic is Arthur H
Nason, Heralds and Heraldry in Ben Jonson's Plays, Masques and
Entertainments (1907, repr NY 1968). It may be that JFR Day has
something to say on the subject in his article in The Sixteenth
Century Journal (c1990) on heraldry and literature, or in his earlier
Duke dissertation.
The motto 'Not Without Mustard' is often taken to be an allusion to
Shakespeare's 'Non Sans Droict'; see e.g. Wagner, Heralds of England p
203. That doesn't mean it is, of course.
Chas
>
> It seems to me, therefore that the plates, as argent roundels, should
> represent silver coins, as payment for some "Chargeable" work
> achieved, but I can find no information about plates to confirm this.
> Also, am I correct in assuming that the plates would appear one to
> each side and one under the point of the chevron? Or would it be over
> the point?
A plate looks like a plate and that is why it is called a plate. A
bezant on the other hand looks like a Bezant and would normally be
used to represent money. As barter was a regular form of payment -
any charge could be used to represent a transaction. "Sometimes a
cigar is just a cigar." Sigmund Freud (1856 - 1939)
Regards
Nessus
> Sogliardo's arms (in the wrds of Michael J O'Shea, James Joyce and
> Heraldry [NY 1986], p 35) are "the heraldic equivalent of a fool's
> motley". A good, though old, secondary source on the topic is Arthur H
> Nason, Heralds and Heraldry in Ben Jonson's Plays, Masques and
> Entertainments (1907, repr NY 1968).
Ah, thank you! That gives me an actual picture of the arms, which is
much easier than trying to photoshop it myself. I have no doubt that
the gyrony and the checquy together are intended to allude to a fool's
motley, but it still seems to me that Jonson, who has obviously picked
his blazons very carefully, has still more meaning left. It seems to
me that the chevron and plates are possibly alluding to how Sogliardo
made the money he has used to buy his arms. Nason also quotes other
sources indicating that the chevron is generally an allusion to a
craftsman's work. Perhaps a commission of some kind from an Earl?
> The motto 'Not Without Mustard' is often taken to be an allusion to
> Shakespeare's 'Non Sans Droict'; see e.g. Wagner, Heralds of England p
> 203. That doesn't mean it is, of course.
Yes, it could well be someone else who had bought themselves arms, had
a motto that begins with "Not Without", worked as a clown actor, was
often the butt of country bumpkin jokes and had a reputation of being
close with money. But I can't really think of anyone else who fits
that bill. Shakespeare is also known to have been familiar with the
Earl of Southampton at the very least.
Turenne
> Shakespeare is also known to have been familiar with the Earl of Southampton at the very least.
There were a number of acting troupes around at the time, which
included those commissioned by Lord Strange, Lord Howard of Effingham,
Lord Hunsdon and the Earl of Leicester. Shakespeare and possibly
Marlowe had the Earls of Rutland and Southampton as their patrons.
Richard L
Madalch
> CARLO. Ay, and rampant too! troth, I commend the herald's wit, he has
> decyphered him well: a swine without a head, without brain, wit,
> anything indeed, ramping to gentility.
That's hilarious.
> SOGLIARDO [READS.] "Gyrony of eight pieces; azure and gules; between
> three plates, a chevron engrailed checquy, or, vert, and ermins; on a
> chief argent, between two ann'lets sable, a boar's head, proper."
I think the blazon of the shield (apart from the supper-table chief)
is mostly to be humourous only in that it is as eye-wrenchingly
colourful and cluttered as possible.
> PUNTARVOLO Let the word be, 'Not without mustard': your crest is very
> rare, sir.
ROFL!
Nessus
This is why I love Jonson. He's taken this a long step beyond even
canting humor into visual and heraldic puns. Can you imagine the
effect on an entire audience to whom heraldry was effectively a second
language? :)
"Alas! 'tis true, I have gone here and there,
And made my self a motley to the view"
-Sonnet 110
Turenne
>Why a conman? There's ample literature from the time, some of it
>previously discussed in this group, of ridicule aimed at those who
>paid to obtain arms from the official heralds.
Ben Jonson writes:
"They forgot they are in the statute, the rascles; they are blazoned
there; there they are tricked, they and their pedigrees." - Ben
Johnson: Poctaster, i, 1.
The way that he puns the word 'tricked' rather indicates that he felt
that people invented their pedigrees to obtain a grant of arms.
Richard L
Nessus
Something else now strikes me. I think Chas is right in pointing out
that coins would more probably be represented by Bezants, which had
not occurred to me at all. So if a plate is a plate, it seems to me
now that the perfect pun is right there. Jonson has the boar’s head
and puddings on a table, and below that… plates! :)