{"word_count": 1953, "character_count": 12559}
[caption id="attachment_6134" align="alignleft" width="170"] brass of Thomas and Emma Pounder (1525) in Ipswich, drawn and etched by Wat Hagreen. (Image: Frontispiece of John Wodderspoon, Memorials of Ipswich, 1850.)[/caption]Medieval churches still abound in coats of arms depicted on tombs, epitaphs, windows, altarpieces and other commemorative devices. And of course it was not just knights, nobles, princes and kings that tried to preserve their memory by means of heraldry. Medieval townspeople, too, left behind heraldic reminders in the churches in England and Germany, for instance. The Nuremberg patrician Sebald Schreyer (d. 1520) noted a stained-glass window embellished with the Schreyer arms given to a local church as a ‘remembrance’ (gedechtnus) of his late father, ((See Gümbel, Albert, ‘Kirchliche Stiftungen Sebald Schreyers 1477–1517’, Mitteilungen des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Nürnberg, 18 (1908), 99–133, 100–132.)) just as York alderman and merchant Richard Wartere (d. 1465) commissioned a liturgical garment whilst revealingly requesting ‘that my executors add a shield of my arms to said vestment, in the same way as it is made above the sarcophagus of my tomb, […] with the intention that the people may pray especially for my soul.’ ((Raine, James, ed., Testamenta Eboracensia: A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York, The Publications of the Surtees Society, 30, 6 vols. (Durham; London; Edinburgh, 1855), ii, 274: ‘Volo quod executores meo faciant scutum cum armis meis, sicut factum est super sarcophagum sepulcri mei, sculptum super libellum dictae capae, ea intencione ut populus specialiter oret pro anima mea.’))Naturally, modern historians argue that next to an admonition for pious prayer and commemoration, a certain desire for status representation and elevation also motivated the donors of such displays. ((See, for example, Badham, Sally F., ‘Status and Salvation: The Design of Medieval English Brasses and Incised Slabs’, Transactions of the Monumental Brass Society, 15 (1996), 413–65.)) Strikingly, medieval contemporaries, too, were at times similarly suspicious of the ‘true’ intentions behind heraldic memoria, and in fact addressed the ostentatious display of heraldry in (urban) churches quite critically.German Criticism of Heraldry in the Middle AgesThe primary literary example appears to be Hans Vintler’s Die Pluemen der Tugendt (1411), which harshly scolded the ‘vanity’ of those seeking to display their shields and banners in churches; some, the poet warned, even wanted their arms to ‘embellish the vestments and chalices with which one worships God’, causing priests to look like minstrels and heralds and thereby making a mockery of the divine service! ((Vintler, Hans, Die Pluemen der Tugent, ed. by Ignaz Vincenz Zingerle (Innsbruck, 1874), vv. 9653–9719: ‘So haben ietzund etleich herren / die allerschnödisten hochfart, / als sie ie bechennet wart, / als umb die schilt und panier / und ander wunderleich groyr, / die da in der chirchen stecket, / und mit dem selben so wecket / man neur die abgötterei / und vergisst man got da pei. / wann es sicht maniger man / die wappen alsomit vleis an, / das er vergisst der heilichait da, / [...] Wilhelmus tuet uns auch chunt / in seinem puech Racional / das etleich edling sein so chal, / die sich lassen genüegen nicht / an den schönen panier liecht, / die da in der chirchen hangen, / es müessen auch ir wappen prangen / auf den kaseln und umeral, / da man got inne wandeln sol; so sein die kelch mit wappen geziert, / da man got inne celebriert. / [...] sullen nu pfaffen ain soleich chrei / tragen mit den spilleuten, / die da pfeifen sullen den preuten, / und sullen wappen als herolt tragen! / [...] es möcht sich leicht also füegen, / das etleich den teufel trüegen, / ob er in wurd auf genat / für ain wappen. also stat / sein si an dem lieben got, / also machen si in ze spot.’))In Nuremberg, which is of course famous for its many heraldic memorial shields (Totenschilde), the urban administration at the end of the fifteenth century likewise grew to dislike the presence of heraldry in churches and showed considerable concern over their moral implications: It was forbidden ‘to engrave, affix, or paint any shields, signs or plates’ inside the city’s churches and chapels. ((Baader, Joseph, ed., Nürnberger Polizeiordnungen aus dem XIII bis XV Jahrhundert, Bibliothek des literarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, 63 (Stuttgart, 1861), 114: ‘Auch gebietten unnser herren vom rate, das hinfür kayn ir burger, burgerin, ir gewalt oder yemants vin iren wege zu sant Sebolt, zu sant Lorennntzen, zum newen spital und unnser lieben frowen capeln inn eynichen stull derselben kyrchen, noch an oder inn dieselben kyrchen eynich gemeldhe, schylt, zaychen oder tafeln nyt schlahen, henncken oder malen, auch nicht absprechen lassen, auch auf kaynen grabstayn eynichen schylt oder zaychen machen lassen, on wissen unnd sonnder vergunst des kyrchenmaysters.’)) Neither were there to be ‘shields or signs on any tombstones’ without prior consultation and official consent. ((Ibid.)) Indeed, in an attempt ‘to suppress haughtiness, pomposity, and squandering’, the council declared that ‘memorial shields and stained glass’ ought not to cost more than three guldens in total, since previously ‘the size and splendour of memorial shields in the churches had caused bountiful copiousness’, whose ‘costly vanity’ was believed to contradict the common weal and proper praise of God. ((Ibid., 113–114: ‘Eyn erber rate dieser statt ist […] zu verdruckung hoffart, kostlichkayt und uncost daran komen, ernstlich und vestiglich gebietennde, das hynfür eynicher ir burger oder burgerin dieser statt oder yemands anders von iren wegen an gemaynen stetten und ennden inn dieser statt und gepiete nyt auffrichten uder aufnhencken sollen oder zu bescheen verfügen eynichen leychenschilt oder scheyben, der über drey guldin cost oder werdt sey. […] Es soll auch eynicher leychschylt oder scheyben hie inn dieser statt unnd inns eins erbern rats gepiettem am gemaynen stetten nit aufgehanngen werden on sonnders wissen und gunst der kyrchenpfleger oder der jhenen, die des zu erlawben macht haben bei der gemelten peen zehen guldin. Nachdem bisshere auch mit aufhenckung der lychschylt in namen und von wegen der abgestorben personen hie inn den kyrchen mit grosse und kostlichayt manigfaltige uberflüssigkeit fürgenomen, geübt und gebruacht worden, ist ayn erber rate, got dem allmechtigen zu lobe auch umb gemyned nutz und notturft willen, solliche eytelkayt des uncostens, auch sorgveltigkait des abfalles sollicher schylte, veryhdnerung der liecht und anndere ursach angesehen […] daran komen [...] das hynfür eynicher burger [...] eynichen leychschylt über die grosse und mass, von eynem erbern rat darzu verordnet [...] nicht auffhencken [...].’))Conveniently for the council, their critical view on overly elaborate and expensive heraldry in churches was supported by the teachings of religious scholars and preachers. The preacher Johannes Tauler (c. 1300–1361), for instance, accused the donors of stained glass, altars and ecclesiastic vestments of having ulterior motives in front of an audience in Cologne:People are generous in their donations only so that people know about it and pray for them. For this reason they furnish the churches with windows, vestments and altars, and mark them with their arms and names so that it may be seen by everyone. ((Tauler, Johannes, Die Predigten aus der Engelberger und der Freiburger Handschrift sowie aus Schmidts Abschriften der ehemaligen Strassburger Handschriften, ed. by Ferdinand Vetter (Hildesheim, 1910), 185: ‘So gebent die lute ir almusen und wellent das es die lute wissen, als das sie fur si sullen bitten. Und so machent sie venster und elter und gerwe, und wellent das man das wisse, und zeichenent das mit schilten, das es alle lute sehen.’))In 1469, similar opinions on heraldry in churches must have moved Johannes Philippi, vicar general of the Franciscans, to ordain that all liturgical vestments in the city of Nuremberg were to be purged of the coats of arms of their donors. ((See Analecta Franciscana sive chronica allaque varia documenta ad historiam Fratrum Minorum spectantia, 10 vols. (Ad Claras Aquas/Quaracchi, 1887), ii, 440–441.)) Again, in 1480, Johannes Altpart, guardianus of Nuremberg, attempted to abolish heraldry in the city’s churches and started by gathering ‘all arms and ensigns of burgesses, until then hanging in the Franciscan church without order’. ((See ibid., 471.)) Although both times the preachers’ efforts were thwarted by defiant burgesses, opposition towards pompous heraldic display in churches remained present, especially once the German Reformation had begun to spread its iconophobic attitudes: Martin Luther, for example, argued in the sixteenth century: ‘If one wishes to honour burial places, it is a decent thing to embellish the walls with fair epitaphs or bible verses so that may be right in front of the observer’s eyes […]; such verses and inscriptions are more suited to decorate the cemeteries than other secular signs [such as] shields, helmets and others.’ ((Luther, Martin, Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe, ed. by Joachim Karl Friedrich Knaake (Weimar, 1923), xxxv, 480–481: ‘Wenn man auch sonst die greber wolt ehren, were es fein, an die wende, wo sie da sind, gute epitaphia oder sprüche aus der schrift drüber zu machen oder zu schreiben, das sie fur augen weren denen, so zur leiche oder auff den kirchoff giengen. […] Sölche sprüche und grabesschrift zierten die kirchoff besser, denn sonst andere weltliche zeichen, schild, helm etc.’))Early-Modern Criticism of Heraldry in EnglandWhile I would be most curious to find similar criticisms of heraldic commemoration for medieval England—particularly for medieval English towns and cities—at the moment it seems to me that this was quite a German-speaking phenomenon, at least in the middle ages.In England, moral criticism of heraldry only appears to emerge in the early modern period under the impression of the English Reformation, for which Mervyn James generally observed ‘a denigration of the honour cult of lineage, ceremony and magnificence, and of such honour symbols as coats of arms.’ ((James, Mervyn Evans, ‘English Politics and the Concept of Honour, 1485–1642’, in Society, Politics and Culture: Studies in Early Modern England, ed. by idem (Cambridge, 1986), 308–415, 320–321.)) Laurence Humphrey’s treatise The Nobles or of Nobilitye (1563), for instance, poses the provocative question ‘What braggest thou then thy stately enseignes, or thy vayne armes?’, ((Humphrey, Laurence, The Nobles or of Nobilitye: The Original Nature, Dutyes, Right, and Christian Institucion Thereof Three Bookes [etc.] (London, 1563), ch. ii, no page.)) and admonishes the vain sinner that ‘lytle accompte his stocke, armes, name, titles, hys parents glorie, hys owne fame, honor, welth, and al the rest, that seeme to other noblest, and moste gorgeous’. ((Ibid., ch. iii, no page.)) Rather, the theologian warns, ‘the lorde wyll roote oute the rootes of the proud’. ((Ibid., ch. ii, no page.)) Two decades later, in 1583, Bishop Marmaduke Middleton as well as his colleague Anthony Gilby similarly criticised the ritual custom of offering shield, helmet and crest at the (heraldic) funeral of an armiger as a ‘popish’ habit that was better abandoned. However, as Jennifer Woodward further observes, ‘the very fact that both Middleton and Gilby felt the need to comment indicates [...] that offerings were still common practice in the 1580s.’ ((Woodward, Jennifer, The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England, 1570–1625 (Woodbridge; Rochester [New York], 1997), 48.)) Indeed, later still the poet John Gay (d. 1732) famously criticised the vanity of heraldic funeral  pomp:Why is the hearse with scutcheons blazon’d round,And with the nodding plume of ostrich crown’d?No the dead know it not, nor profit gain;It only serves to prove the living, vain. ((The Poems of John Gay (London, 1812), ii, 54.))Since such accounts are highly indicative of contemporary attitudes to heraldry and underline the co-existence of different and indeed sometimes critical perceptions of heraldic communication in the medieval and early modern period, I would be most grateful for any similar examples of moral criticism of heraldry in England or other parts of Europe that you may be aware of, and I am looking forward to any other comments you may have.[cite]