For this final post on the heraldry to be seen in the 1969 movie Anne of the Thousand Days, starring Richard Burton, Genevieve Bujold, Irene Pappas, and Anthony Quayle, the heraldry we are looking at today is a bit of a mixed bag. I'd give them an "A" for effort, but in the end my feeling is that of the statement, "Close, but no cigar."
Let me show you what I mean.
There are two pieces of heraldry to discuss in this still from the movie: a standard, and a banner.
The standard (in the center of the photo) appears to be that of King Henry VIII, although it lacks the cross of St. George in the hoist. See image from Wikipedia (immediately below) for comparison.
As you can see (you may want to click on the first image to see the full-size version for better - though not great - detail), the two standards look very much alike, but the one from the movie lacks the cross of St. George/arms of England in the hoist.
Next, the arms on the banner (as opposed to what it should be, a banner of the arms) look like a close variant of the arms of Howard, Duke of Norfolk: Quarterly: 1, Gules on a bend between six crosses crosslet fitchy argent an escutcheon or charged with a demi-lion rampant pierced through the mouth by an arrow within a double tressure flory counterflory gules (Howard); 2, Gules three lions passant guardant in pale or in chief a label of three points argent (Brotherton); 3, Checky or and azure (Warren); and 4, Gules a lion rampant or (Fitzalan).
The difference in the banner here (ignoring as much as I can the fact that the mantling issues from some kind of a coronet, which is NOT the coronet of a duke, or even that of an earl, instead of a helm) has something that doesn’t look quite like crosses crosslet fitchy in the first quarter, and the second quarter has an azure field instead of gules (I can’t make out the charge(s) on this quarter at all, whether they are lions or something else) and a label of five points.
Next, the arms on the banner (as opposed to what it should be, a banner of the arms) look like a close variant of the arms of Howard, Duke of Norfolk: Quarterly: 1, Gules on a bend between six crosses crosslet fitchy argent an escutcheon or charged with a demi-lion rampant pierced through the mouth by an arrow within a double tressure flory counterflory gules (Howard); 2, Gules three lions passant guardant in pale or in chief a label of three points argent (Brotherton); 3, Checky or and azure (Warren); and 4, Gules a lion rampant or (Fitzalan).
The difference in the banner here (ignoring as much as I can the fact that the mantling issues from some kind of a coronet, which is NOT the coronet of a duke, or even that of an earl, instead of a helm) has something that doesn’t look quite like crosses crosslet fitchy in the first quarter, and the second quarter has an azure field instead of gules (I can’t make out the charge(s) on this quarter at all, whether they are lions or something else) and a label of five points.
It's almost like someone who didn't know the difference between a banner of a coat of arms, and a square flag with a blue field that has a sort-of achievement of arms on it (not terribly unlike many of the state flags of various U.S. states, now that I think about it!), wanted to put the arms of Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk (who was the uncle of both Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard) on it, but either didn't want to, or didn't know enough to, copy them properly, and ended up with this "almost but not quite" depiction.
As I said, I'd give it an "A" for effort, because they did come "close, but no cigar" (for hitting the mark correctly.
As I said, I'd give it an "A" for effort, because they did come "close, but no cigar" (for hitting the mark correctly.
The final coat of arms from the movie is the one on the chairback in this scene:
I have been unable to determine whose arms these are, even assuming that they are a real coat of arms and not something created from someone's imagination just for this scene in the movie.
They are somewhat difficult of blazon. There is a blue field, and three gold rampant lions, but then a small gold rose between two black, perhaps, birds? across the center of the shield.
I very much dislike in blazoning to follow the field immediately with the word "between,"* particularly when, as here, the surrounding charges seem to be of greater size (and importance) than the smaller charges in fess. So the best that I can come up with is: Azure three lions rampant, between them in fess a rose or between two [birds?] sable.
I am not truly content with that blazon, but since I have been unable to fnd these arms under this or any other blazon, I'm not sure that I need to worry much over it. Is it a "real" coat of arms? It may be. And if it is, it is also entirely possible that the colors of the field and/or the charges are incorrectly painted. But I'm not going to spend the time necessary tracking down all of the possible arms of "[field] three lions rampant, between them in fess a rose between two birds." Just sayin'.
Still and all, it's been an intersting romp through this particular old movie, looking at all the heraldry, seeing what they got right, what they got wrong, and what they almost got right. I hope that you have enjoyed this as much as I have. And if you ever get the chance to see this movie in the future (it's available on DVD, and shows up occasionally on Turner Classic Movies on cable), I hope you notice its many displays of heraldry!
* The general rule of blazon that I learned years and years (and years!) ago was to "blazon from the field up, and from the center out". That is to say, blazon the field first, then the charges lying on the field, then the charges lying on other charges; and also blazon from the center of the shield first, and then the outer or peripheral charge(s).


No comments:
Post a Comment