Читать книгу Notes and Queries, Number 43, August 24, 1850 - Various - Страница 2

The interest which attaches to this very ancient and distinguished ensign of chivalrous honour will excuse the introduction into your pages of a fuller dissertation upon the subject than what appears in "NOTES AND QUERIES," Nos. 39. and 41., in answer to the several questions put by your correspondents B. and [Greek: Ph].

After referring to the papers on the Collar of SS., and other collars of livery, published a few years ago in the Gentleman's Magazine, and his intention to arrange them, and other additional collections on the same subject, in the shape of a small volume, MR. J.G. NICHOLS proceeds to say:

"As a direct answer to B.'s question, 'Is there any list of persons who were honoured with that badge, (viz., the Collar of SS.?)', I may reply, No. Persons were not, in fact, 'honoured with the badge,' in the sense that persons are now decorated with stars, crosses, or medals; but the livery collar was assumed by parties holding a certain position. So far as can be ascertained, these were either knights attached to the royal household or service, who wore gold or gilt collars, or esquires in the like position who wore silver collars."

From the statute for the regulation of apparel, passed in the 2nd year of the reign of Henry IV., it is ordained that—

"All the sons of the king, dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes, might use the livery of our Lord the King of his collar as well in his absence as in his presence; and that all other knights and esquires should use it only in the presence of the king and not in his absence."

The royal assent to this bill was accompanied with further regulations, among which were:

"That the dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes of the realm might use the said livery in their counties and elsewhere; and that knights and esquires might use the said livery in going from the hostel of the king and returning, to it, always provided that they did not use it in the counties and countries in which they resided or sojourned."

That the golden Collar of SS. was the undoubted badge or mark of a knight (chevalier, eques auratus seu ordo equestris, for these words respectively indicate the same grade or dignity of knighthood) all our ancient heraldic writers allow. But, were it otherwise, the extract from the statute above given shows that MR. NICHOLS is incorrect in stating, 1st. That there is no list of persons who were honoured with the collar of SS.; 2nd. That persons were not honoured with the badge, in the sense that persons are now decorated with stars, crosses, &c.; 3rd. That the collar was assumed; and, 4th. That the assumers were, "so far as can be ascertained, knights holding a certain position,—such as being attached to the royal household or service."

It is important to point out these four inaccuracies of MR. NICHOLS' reply to B., because it is desirable that his forthcoming volume should not be a heterogeneous collection of notices relating to the Collar of SS., mixed up with observations that will only serve the purpose of darkening knowledge upon the subject of which he treats.

The Collar of SS. is found in great variety of shapes, and at what precise time it became an ensign of equestrian nobility no one can tell. Collars were worn at least so far back as the days of Livy (i.e. the commencement of the Christian era); for he recounts that Manlius having pulled off the collar of a Gaul, took the name of Torquatus, and afterwards always wore the collar. Such being the case, there is no room for doubting that this ensign formed one of the ornaments of knighthood from the period of that dignity's earliest introduction into England.

There is a notion, from the circumstance of "Soverayne" being the favourite motto or impress of Henry IV., that the Collar of SS. takes its name from the initial letter of that word; and the introduction of the portcullis into the collar, which was the device of the House of Lancaster, is also considered by some as proof that the collar originated with that king. In the effigies, however, of Henry IV. and his queen, Joan of Navarre, in the Chapel of St. Thomas Becket, Canterbury Cathedral, the collar which appears round the neck of the queen (there is none upon that of the king) has no portcullis. And as to the derivations of the name of the collar from "Soverayne," from St. Simplicius, from the martyrs of Soissons (viz. St. Crespin and St. Crespinian, upon whose anniversary the battle of Agincourt was fought), from the Countess of Salisbury, of Garter notoriety, from the word "Souvenez" and, lastly, from Seneschallus or Steward (which latter is MR. NICHOLS' notion)—they may all be regarded as mere monkish or heraldic gossip.

Nicholas Upton, one of our earliest heraldic writers, who was present at the siege of Orleans in 1428, states,—"Rex etiam scoeie dare solebat pro signo vel titulo suo unum COLLARIUM de gormettis fremalibus equorum de auro vel argento;" whilst, in a wood-cut engraving of the arms of a German, Herr Florian Waldauff, of about the time of Albert Durer, are three collars, one of the letters SS. linkings into each other, terminating in front with portcullises. Put these notices together and they may be considered sufficient to demolish the Lancastrian origin theory of the collar, on the one hand, and to unfold the true source of the collar's nomenclature on the other, viz. that it comes from the S-shaped lever upon the bit of the bridle of the war steed.

To [Greek: Ph].'s question, "Who are the persons now privileged to wear these collars?" MR. NICHOLS answers, "I believe the reply must be confined to the judges, the Lord Mayor of London, the Lord Mayor of Dublin, the kings and heralds of arms." The privilege of wearing a Collar of SS., so far as the various persons enumerated are concerned, is a mere official privilege, and can scarcely be cited in reply to [Greek: Ph].'s interrogative, except upon the principle, "Exceptio probat regulam." The persons now privileged to wear the ancient golden Collar of SS. are the equites aurati, or knights (chevaliers) in the British monarchy, a body which includes all the hereditary order of baronets in England, Scotland, and Ireland, with such of their eldest sons, being of age, as choose to claim inauguration as knights. It is presumable too that the Collar of SS. is also an incident of the minor degree of knight bachelor (bas-chevalier seu miles-bachillarus); whilst the silver Collar of SS. belongs to every head of a family of ancient esquirage quality, bearing arms. It is true, the fashion of wearing the collar, whether gold or silver, may be said to have been in desuetude for centuries. But rights of blood never prescribe; and there are strong grounds to believe that there will again be a general revival of the use of such distinctions.

There are various other points bearing upon the subject of the Collar of SS., upon which I wish to offer some remarks, and with your permission I will return to the subject. I cannot, however, conclude without observing, that it would much add to the value of MR. NICHOLS' compilation if he would extend it so as to embrace a description of the floreal coronet of knighthood, the belt of honour, the helmet, scarf, ring, spars, &c.,—all indeed, that the words "ad recipiendum a nobis ARMA MILITARIA" implied in the ancient proclamations for taking the order of knighthood. If MR. NICHOLS, in addition to this, will show also wherein the knights of this equestrian quality differed from such persons as were distrained "ad se milites faciendos," he will solve a number of knotty difficulties in heraldic literature, and will enable the public generally to understand that there are many more chivalrous rights and privileges inherent in the subject than what is dreamt of in the philosophy either of the court at St. James's, or the college on St. Bennet's Hill.

ARMIGER.