1) The Creature.-The first concept within the symbol is in the particular being represented, whether or not actual or fictitious, as a man, a lion, an eagle, a dragon, &c., of the type and accepted character for some specific quality or attribute of mind or physique, as fierceness, valour, fleetness, &c. Many poets and artists of trendy times seem to have lost sight of the traditions of sacred artwork, and of their endeavours to spiritualise the character of angelic beings have in this respect been led to portray them as altogether feminine in form and look. In like manner all types of peaceable or gentle-natured creatures must be set forth of their most noble and kindly action, every in its disposition and that which is most agreeable to nature, somewhat than of an opposite character. He could curl the mane of his lion, fancifully develop its tongue and tail, and show its claws in a way for which there’s little or no authority in nature; but if he add wings, or endow it with a plurality of heads or tails, it immediately becomes another creature and a completely completely different image. By the artists of the Middle Ages they are depicted in as hideous a manner as could be conceived, more generally of the Satyr type with horns and hoofs and tail, which final connects them with the Dragon of the Apocalypse, the impersonation of the Supreme Spirit of evil (see Dragon).
Ministering Spirits or Guardian Angels.-These kind a frequent theme of poets and artists. The Wings Variously Coloured.-Not content with a easy departure in kind from all natural wings, the early and Middle Age artists resorted to many expedients to speculate their angels’ wings with unearthly traits. In all ages civilised man has thought of them and represented them in artwork as of form prefer to his own, and with attributes of volition and power prompt by wings. A author in the Ecclesiastical Art Review, May 1878, I. Lewis André, architect, says that “we seldom find angels clad in every other ecclesiastical vestments than the Alb (or tunic of assorted colours), and the amice. Instead of the amice we typically discover a scarf or cloth tied in a knot around the neck, the ends falling down in entrance. In Egyptian art, Neith, the goddess of the heavens, was generally represented with wings, and in the marbles of Nineveh we find human figures displaying 4 wings. This error must be fastidiously averted, because in a spiritual in addition to in a human sense the vigorous active precept they signify, in addition to having the warrant of Scripture, is more fitly represented by man than by lady.
The idea of including wings to the human form has existed from remote antiquity, and for the earliest suggestion of celestial beings of the winged human sort we should look to the art works of Egypt and Assyria. St. Dionysius relates that there are three hierarchies of angels and three orders in every; and by clever allegories each had his particular mission, and they had been every depicted with sure insignia by which they were recognised in artwork representations, which vary considerably in examples of various durations. Nimbus.-The nimbi given to all of the orders of the angelic hierarchy are circular in form, with their fields either plain or covered with quite a few radiating traces or rays, generally with broad borders of ornament, but by no means with the tri-radiate form, which was specially reserved for the persons of the trinity. Lord Bacon (“Advancement of Learning,” Book i.) says we find, as far as credit is to be given to the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the supposed Dionysius, the Senator of Athens, that the primary place or diploma is given to the angels of love, which are termed Seraphim; the second to the angels of light, that are termed Cherubim; and the third, and so following places, to thrones, principalities, and the remainder, that are all angels of power and ministry, so that the angels of data and illumination are placed before the angels of workplace and domination.
It is going to be observable that within the fingers of a capable designer imbued with the true heraldic spirit, all objects, animate and inanimate, conform after their variety to decorative necessities, and assume shapes more or less conventional, and, as far as is in step with effective display of the cost, are made to accommodate themselves to the space they must occupy. It will likely be seen that to interpret the meaning implied in any particular cost, the tinctures, as nicely as the perspective, should be thought-about. He may not alter the recognised symbolic angle, nor change the tincture; he is scarcely at liberty to add a function. Whatever liberty the artist could take in his interpretation of the form of chicken, beast, or monster, there may be, nonetheless, a limit to his licence beyond which he could not go. Should any causes be wanted to enforce the necessity of adhering strictly to the heraldic regulation in which angle performs such an necessary part, it could also be needful solely to refer to at least one or two examples, and cite as an occasion in level the noblest of all created beings, and ask whether or not, of the various acts in which imperious man himself could also be heraldically portrayed, the action or position in which he is to be depicted shouldn’t point out distinctly the concept that is to be related to the illustration?
