Heraldry and Badges

Do you know who actually painted the heraldry on shields and/or armor? (I'm not certain armor was painted for any reason other than to prevent rust, but I could be wrong.)

This turned into a far longer reply than you were probably expecting - or, knowing me, maybe not… :-) but I hope it helps answer the question!

“Who did the painting” is something I’d never thought about. @dduane is acquainted with Alastair Bruce, FitzalanPursuivant Extraordinary at the College of Arms, who should know the properanswer. I’ll get her to ask and meanwhile, I’ll guesstimate.

As far as I know there wasn’t anofficial “Guild of Heraldic Painters”, though I could be wrong, therewere guilds for so many things, and they may have had a less-obvious periodname. It’s likely that anyone doing thissort of work would either consult with a professional herald or have access to a list of who was already using what symbols, patterns, colours etc., sincegetting your knuckles rapped in the Middle Ages could involve a big hammer.

A country knight probably gave the job to anyone good with a paintbrush –his priest, maybe, or the man who painted the local tavern sign – but great magnateslike the Earl of Warwick, Duke of Gloucester, Earl of March and so on may have had anarts-and-crafts section. (Badges were embroidered and cast in metal as well as painted.) This section would maintain the accurateappearance of their principal “brand and logo” (Bear And Ragged Staff, White Boar, Sun In Splendour etc.) as worn on the livery of their retinue.

Warwick himself had an impressively elaborate coat of arms, reflecting a family history of marriages, alliances and titles, but as portrayed in the Rous Roll with his wife Anne Beauchamp, he’s using the much less complicated arms of the Earldom of Salisbury.

Heather Child (“HeraldicDesign” © 1963), says that coat of arms were first used by the greatnobility, but by the thirteenth century were commonly used by lesser nobility,knights and gentlemen. Less than a century later it had been established in lawthat no man could use another’s arms, while Royal command prohibited thewearing of arms without proper authority. Even then, it wasn’t until 1484 thatRichard III established the College of Heralds.

In “The Complete Book ofHeraldry” (© Anness Publishing Ltd 2002), Stephen Slater quotes the Anglo-Normanpoet Robert Wace, who claimed that “atHastings, the Normans had made cognizances is so that one Norman couldrecognise another.” I’m not so sure.

There’sno rhyme or reason to the shield crests in the Tapestry, which makes me thinkthey were no more than patterns and images the wearer liked, rather thanidentification heraldry. Duke William famously had to raise or remove his helmet to counter a rumour he’d been killed (on the left, shown complete with the label “Hic est Dux Willem” - Here is Duke William.)

Once heraldry was established as a military and socialskill, illustrations in manuscripts (here the German “Codex Manesse”, early1300s) could look like this…

…and interested readers would have been expected torecognise each coat of arms, blazon them properly (i.e. describe them in correct technical language,so that anyone who had never seen a particular coat of arms would know exactlywhat it looked like) name every combatant in the picture and quitepossibly give their tournament scores as well… 

Here’s an interesting detail from anotherillustration:

I’mguessing, but I think the paint used for the crests on shield and helmet containedreal silver, which would have looked impressive when new but has tarnished downto grey. The smaller crests on surcoat and horse-caparison were just whitepaint, and have stayed that way.

Mail was essentially self-cleaning in use, since the rings scrubbed together as the wearer moved, but plate armour would indeed have been painted as rust protection as well as decoration. It was also painted with oil then heated, a process like seasoninga cast iron pan and creating the same sort of protective layer. Painting and “seasoning” was often done rough from the hammer, not polished smooth, since the “keyed” surface helped the oil or paint stick in place.

I’ve writtenalready that the “knights in shining armour” concept was Victorianrather than mediaeval. Many armours displayed in museums are missing theirengraved details because of overenthusiastic polishing in the eighteenth andnineteenth centuries. Period illustrations do show “white harness” as it was called (polishing gave idle squires something to keep them out of mischief)…

…but just as often plate armour is shown inshades of dark blue and even black, with painted highlights to show itwas meant to be a polished surface.

This painting, from a box of wargaming figures, gives a modern version of what  the dark armour might have looked like. An army made up entirely of Darth Vaders.