Edmund Leighton's painting "The Accolade" has a young man being Knighted. He is wearing, presumably, his lord's livery/CoA. Does anyone here at IAAH have any information on whether that livery was factual, or is it "fantasy heraldry"?
The painting may be viewed here,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Accolade_(Leighton)
The livery used in "The Accolade"
- Cameron Campbell
- Posts: 70
- Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 11:38
- Location: United States
- Jeremy Fox
- Posts: 56
- Joined: 19 Dec 2017, 15:14
- Contact:
Re: The livery used in "The Accolade"
It looks like his own arms, as his squire is standing at the side with his shield.
The arms are not in Papworth, (not that that is definitive,) but a black eagle on red is a bit suspect. I guess at fantasy with Germanic influences
The arms are not in Papworth, (not that that is definitive,) but a black eagle on red is a bit suspect. I guess at fantasy with Germanic influences
- Chris Green
- Posts: 3621
- Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
- Location: Karlstad, Sweden
Re: The livery used in "The Accolade"
As the picture is in the public domain, here it is:
The painting is of course late Victorian (1901), and is thus immediately suspect as to veracity. The knight-to-be is wearing chain-mail with coif and no (visible) plate. That would make the period 13th century (or earlier). The helmet however is very suspect for the period.
As to the surcoat: the Silesian eagle with crescent (Schlesischer Adler) dates from the 13th century, which is OK as far as matching the mail goes, but the field should be or not gules. The tincture "rule" is of course violated by the use of sable on gules. One might - just - have got away with the argument that this is a livery not a surcoat except that the page standing in the background is supporting the new knight's shield, which bears the same arms as the surcoat. The surcoat itself is too short for the 13th century and should come to mid-calf and have slits front and back for use on horseback.
I am no expert in medieval haircuts, but suspect that the longish "page-boy" cut sported by the new knight was not favoured by men who had to endure a mail coif and helmet. (Very) short back and sides would have been more comfortable, though perhaps was only resorted to when off to war. One web-site which claims an insight into medieval hair-styles claims: "For men, particularly among the nobility, the most common practice was to let the hair grow long and sometimes part it from the middle." But another says: "As for what haircuts a knight would have worn… the most likely one is a bowl cut. It’s a simple, low-maintenance style that fits easily under a helmet, and keeps hair out of your eyes."
The painting is of course late Victorian (1901), and is thus immediately suspect as to veracity. The knight-to-be is wearing chain-mail with coif and no (visible) plate. That would make the period 13th century (or earlier). The helmet however is very suspect for the period.
As to the surcoat: the Silesian eagle with crescent (Schlesischer Adler) dates from the 13th century, which is OK as far as matching the mail goes, but the field should be or not gules. The tincture "rule" is of course violated by the use of sable on gules. One might - just - have got away with the argument that this is a livery not a surcoat except that the page standing in the background is supporting the new knight's shield, which bears the same arms as the surcoat. The surcoat itself is too short for the 13th century and should come to mid-calf and have slits front and back for use on horseback.
I am no expert in medieval haircuts, but suspect that the longish "page-boy" cut sported by the new knight was not favoured by men who had to endure a mail coif and helmet. (Very) short back and sides would have been more comfortable, though perhaps was only resorted to when off to war. One web-site which claims an insight into medieval hair-styles claims: "For men, particularly among the nobility, the most common practice was to let the hair grow long and sometimes part it from the middle." But another says: "As for what haircuts a knight would have worn… the most likely one is a bowl cut. It’s a simple, low-maintenance style that fits easily under a helmet, and keeps hair out of your eyes."
Chris Green
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
- Arthur Radburn
- Posts: 1331
- Joined: 11 Jul 2012, 09:56
Re: The livery used in "The Accolade"
A further anomaly is the tincture of the crescent on the eagle. On the knight's surcoat it is gold, but on the shield held by the page it appears to be silver.
Regards
Arthur Radburn
Arthur Radburn
- Chris Green
- Posts: 3621
- Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
- Location: Karlstad, Sweden
Re: The livery used in "The Accolade"
Arthur Radburn wrote:A further anomaly is the tincture of the crescent on the eagle. On the knight's surcoat it is gold, but on the shield held by the page it appears to be silver.
It may indeed be an anomaly. I saw it and thought it might simply be a poor copy of the original.
Chris Green
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
IAAH President
Bertilak de Hautdesert
-
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 26 Jul 2012, 13:00
- Location: Germany
Re: The livery used in "The Accolade"
My theory is that it is intentionally no one's arms. I imagine that an artist back then might have been more familiar with coats of arms and their rules. If he wanted an unknown knight and at the same time display his arms, this his best bet is to break the rule of tincture.
The arms do look eastern European, the style of the eagle, after all the Albanian arms are Gules, a double headed eagle Sable. I would guess that the Silesian and Albanian arms inspired these. This is all speculation though.
The arms do look eastern European, the style of the eagle, after all the Albanian arms are Gules, a double headed eagle Sable. I would guess that the Silesian and Albanian arms inspired these. This is all speculation though.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests