HERALDRY is properly the knowledge of the whole multifarious duties devolving on a herald (see HERALD): in the more restricted sense, in which we shall here consider it, it is the science of armorial bearings. After occupying for ages the attention of the learned. and forming an important branch of a princely education, the study of heraldry fell, in later times, into neglect and disrepute, and was abandoned to coach-painters and undertakers, a degradation owing in part to the endless tissue of follies and mystifica tions that had been interwoven with it. Modern criticism has rescued heraldry from the pedantries and follies of the heralds, and imparted to it a new interest, as a valuable aid to historical investigations.
Though we have instances in remote times of nations and individuals distinguishing themselves by particular emblems or ensigns, nothing that can properly be called armo rial bearings'existed before the middle of the 12th century. The shields of the French knights in the first crusade presented a plain face of polished metal, nor is there any evidence of heraldic deviceshaving been in use in the second crusade in 1147. But the Anglo-Norman poet Wace, who flourished in the latter part of the 12th c., mentions devices or cognizances as being in use among the Normans, "that no Norman might perish by the hand of another, nor one Frenchman kill another;" and Wace is curiously corroborated by the Bayeux tapestry of the 12th c., where there are figures of animals on the shields of the invaders, while the Saxon shields have only borders or crosses. The rude devices on these shields have nothing approaching to an armorial form or disposition, yet it is probable that systematic heraldry sprang out of them, but it is difficult to say when they assumed that hereditary character which is essential to the idea of armorial bearings. Some sort of armorial insignia were depicted on the shields used in the third crusade, which took place in 1189; and in the same half-century origi nated the fleurs-de-lis of France and the lions of England. The transmission of arms from father to son seems to have been fully recognized in the 13th c., and in the practice then introduced of embroidering the family insignia on the surcoat worn over the ban hark or coat of mail, originated the expression coat of arms. Arms were similarly em broidered on the jupon, cyclas, and tabard, which succeeded the surcoat, a practice which survived till the time of Henry VIII., when the tabard came to be entirely dis used except by heralds, who still continue to wear on their tabards the royal arms.
It was by slow degrees that the usage of arms grew up into the systematized form which it assumes in the works of the established writers on heraldry. The principal existing data for tracing its progress are English rolls of arms yet extant of the times of Henry 111., Edward I., and Edward III. The earliest formal treatises date no further back than the end of the 14th c., before which time the whole historical part of the subject had been obscured by a tissue of gratuitous fictions, which has misled most subsequent writers up to a very recent period. The professors of the science represent
the heraldry of the 10th and 11th centuries as equally sharply defined with that of the 17,1 h and 16th. The arms of William the conqueror and his sons are described with all their differences; arms are ascribed to the Saxon kings of England, to Charlemagne, and even to half-mythical persons and heroes of classical times. It is rather surprising to find this fictitious heraldry understood and systematized early in the 14th century. The arms traditionally considered to be those of Edward the confessor were sculptured in Westminster abbey in the reign of Edward II.
In the infancy of heraldry, every knight assumed what arms he pleased, without consulting sovereign or king-at-arm. Animals, plants. imaginary monsters, things arti ficial, and objects familiar to pilgrims, were all tixed on; and whenever it was possible, the object chosen was one whose name bore sufficient resemblance in sound to suggest the name or title of the bearer of it. There is reason to believe that early arms were generally a rmes parlantes, though the allusion has in many cases ceased to be intelligible from the old name of the object being forgotten. The charge fixed on was used with great latitude, singly or repeated, or in any way which the bearer chose, or the form of his shield suggested. But as coats of arms became more numerous, confusion often arose front different knights adopting the same symbol; and this confusion was increased by a practice which crept in of sovereigns or feudal chiefs allowing their arms, or part of them, to be borne as a mark of honor by their favorite followers in battle. Hence different coats of arms came in many instances so closely to resemble each other that it was imperative, for distinction's sake, that the fancy of the bearer should lie restrained, and regulations laid down regarding the number and position of the charges, and the attitudes of the animals represented. This necessity led, in the course of time, to the systematizing of heraldry, a process which the rolls alluded to show us was going on gradually throughout the 13th and 14th centuries. By the time that heraldry was con into a science, its true origin had been lost sight of, and the credulity and fertility of imagination of the heralds led them to invest the most common charges with mystical meanings, and to trace their original adoption to the desire. of commemorating the adventures or achievements of the founders of the families who bore them. The legends ascribing, an origin of this sort to the early armorial bearings have in nearly all instances where it has been possible to investigate them, turned out to be fabrications. It was only when heraldry began to assume the dignity of a science that augmentations of a commemorative character were granted, one of the earliest known instances being the heart added to the coat of Douglas, in commemoration of the good sir James's pilgrimage with the heart of king Hobert. After the science became thoroughly sys tematized, augmentations and new coats were often granted with a reference' to the supposed symbolical meanings of the charges.