Part 19

As Grecian architecture had a little dawning in Edward the sixth’s time, and made a further progress in the three succeeding reigns, we find, in the great number of monuments which were then erected, the small column introduced with its base and capital, sometimes supporting an arch, sometimes an architrave, but every where mixed with them, may be observed a great deal of the Gothic ornaments retained, as small spires, ill carved images, small square roses and other foliage, painted and gilt, which sufficiently denote the age which made them, though no inscriptions are left.

HERALDIC SYMBOLS.

Some knowledge of heraldry is very necessary in monumental researches, a coat of arms, device, or rebus, very often remains where not the least word of an inscription appears, and where indeed very probably there never was any.

Armorial bearings seem to have taken their rise in this kingdom in the reign of king Richard the first, and by little and little to have become hereditary; it was accounted most honourable to carry those arms which the bearers had displayed in the Holy Land, against the professed enemies of Christianity, but they were not fully established until the latter end of the reign of king Henry the third.

King Richard the first after his return from his captivity in Austria, had a new great seal made, on which seal he first bore three lions passant guardant for his arms, which from this time became the hereditary arms of the kings of England.

The arms assigned or attributed to the kings of the Norman dynasty, namely _gules_, two lions passant guardant, _or_, Mr. Sandford, in his Genealogical History of England, says he could not find had ever been used by those Princes, either on monuments, coins, or seals, but that historians had assigned or fixed them upon the Norman line to distinguish it from that of their successors the Plantagenets, who bore _gules_, three lions passant guardant, _or_.[67] According to the opinion of modern genealogists, king Henry the second, who bore two lions for his arms, in the manner before mentioned, added, on his marriage with Eleanor of Aquitaine, the arms of that dutchy, namely _gules_, a lion, _or_, to his own, and so was the first king of England who bore three lions; but for this there is no better proof than for those assigned to the Norman dynasty, for the arms of king Henry the second upon his monument at Fontevraud in Normandy, are on a shield of a modern form, and on the same monument are escutcheons with both impalements and quarterings which were not used till a hundred years after his death.

King Edward the first was the first son of a king of England that differenced his arms with a file, and the first king of England that bore his arms on the caparisons of his horse.

Margaret of France, second wife of king Edward the first, was the first queen of England that bore her arms _dimidiated_ with her husband’s in one escutcheon, that is, both escutcheons being parted by a perpendicular line, or _per pale_, the dexter side of the husband’s shield, is joined to the sinister side of the wife’s, which kind of bearing is more ancient than the impaling of the entire coats of arms.

King Edward the third, in the year 1339, having taken upon him the title of king of France, was the first of our kings who quartered arms, bearing those of France and England, quarterly, and so careful were the kings, his successors, in marshalling the arms of both kingdoms in the same shield, that when Charles the sixth, king of France, changed the semée of fleurs de lys into three, our king Henry the fifth did the like,[68] and so it continued till the union of Great Britain with Ireland in 1801, when the arms of France were relinquished.

The first example of the quartering of arms, is found in Spain, when the kingdoms of Castile and Leon were united under Ferdinand the third, and was afterwards imitated, as above described, by king Edward the third. Eleanor of Castile, his queen, introduced this mode of bearing arms into England, in which she was followed by the king, her husband.

Until the time of king Edward the third, we find no coronets round the heads of peers. The figure upon the monument of John of Eltham, second son of king Edward the third, who died in 1334, and is buried in Westminster abbey, is adorned with a diadem, composed of a circle of greater and less leaves or flowers, and is the most ancient portraiture of an earl, says Sandford, that has a coronet. For the effigies of Henry Lacy, earl of Lincoln, on his tomb in Old St. Paul’s, had the head encompassed with a circle only, and that of William de Valence, earl of Pembroke, half brother of king John, who died in 1304, and is buried in St. Edmund’s chapel, in Westminster abbey, has only a circle, enriched and embellished with stones of several colours, but without either points, rays, or leaves.

John Hastings, earl of Pembroke, who died in 1375, was the first subject who bore two coats quarterly.

Richard the second was the first of the English kings, who used supporters to his arms.

Henry the sixth was the first of our kings who wore an arched crown, which has been ever since continued by his successors.[69]

Henry the eighth was the first king of England that added to his shield, the garter and the crown, in imitation of which, the knights of the garter, in the latter end of his reign, caused their escutcheons on their stalls at Windsor, to be encompassed with the garter, and those who were dukes, marquesses, or earls, had their coronets placed on their shields, which has been so practised ever since.

Queen Elizabeth was the first sovereign who used in her arms, a harp crowned, as an ensign for the kingdom of Ireland.

King James the first was the first of our monarchs, who quartered the arms of England, Scotland, and Ireland in one shield.

The number of princes of the blood royal of the houses of York and Lancaster, may easily be distinguished, by the labels on their coats of arms, which are different for each, and very often their devices are added.

Where the figure of a woman is found with arms both on her kirtle and mantle, those on the kirtle are always her own family’s, and those on the mantle, her husband’s.

The first instance of arms on sepulchral monuments, in England, are those on the tomb of Geoffrey de Magnaville, first Earl of Essex, (so created in 1148,) in the Temple church, in London. Armorial bearings were used in France, on monuments, forty years before we find them in England.

Very intimately connected with the ornaments and devices upon sepulchral monuments are the figures and dresses of our early monarchs found on their great seals, and of the principal nobility of those times on their seals. King Henry the third was the first English sovereign who wore upon his helmet a crown, and he is also the first king who is depicted upon his great seal as wearing rowels in his spurs in the manner in which they are now used, all the former kings using spurs with a single point or spike from the heel.

Sandford, in his Genealogical History of England, says, that the arms upon the seal of John, Earl of Morton, (afterwards king John,) namely, two lions passant, are the first which he had seen upon any seal of the royal family. This was in the reign of king Henry the second.

MONUMENTS FOR ECCLESIASTICS.

As to monuments for the several degrees of churchmen, as bishops, abbots, priors, monks, &c. or of religious women, they are easily to be distinguished from other persons, but equally difficult to assign to their true owners. Among these, as among the before-mentioned monuments, for the most part the stone effigies are the oldest, with the mitre, crosier, and other proper insignia, and very often wider at the head than feet, having, indeed, been the cover to the stone coffins in which the body was deposited.

When brass plates came in fashion they were likewise much used by bishops, &c. many of whose grave stones remain at this day, very richly adorned, and in many, the indented marble shews that they have been so. In Salisbury cathedral, says Mr. Lethieullier, I found two very ancient stone figures of bishops, which were brought from Old Sarum, and are consequently older than the time of king Henry the third. In that church, likewise, the pompous marble which lies over Nicholas Longespee, bishop of that see, and son of the, Earl of Salisbury, who died in the year 1297, appears to have been richly plated, though the brass is now quite gone, and is one of the most early of that kind which has been met with. Frequently, where there are no effigies, crosiers or crosses denote an ecclesiastic. The latter have been met with, but with little difference in their form, for every order from a bishop to a parish priest.

THE SKELETON MONUMENT.

One sort of monument more may be mentioned, which is somewhat peculiar; this is the representation of a skeleton in a shroud, lying either under or upon, but generally under a table tomb. A monument of this kind is to be met with in almost all the cathedral and conventual churches throughout England, and scarcely ever more than one, but to what age the unknown ones are to be attributed, we have no clue to guide us, since there is one in York cathedral for Robert Claget, treasurer of that church, as ancient as 1241, and in Bristol cathedral, Paul Bush, the first bishop of that see, who died so late as 1558, is represented in the same manner, and some of these figures may be found in every age between.

These skeleton monuments represent the figure of a man emaciated by extreme sickness, or taken immediately after death; they are usually of ecclesiastics, and placed with another figure of the same prelate, as a contrast to his pride, in pontificals. The art of the sculptor is more apparent in the first mentioned, because much anatomical accuracy was required.

One of the earliest monuments of a warrior so contrasted is that of John de Arundel, slain in the French wars, under the Duke of Bedford. It remains in the sepulchral chapel of that noble family at Arundel, and is finely sculptured in white marble. The dead figure, is indeed a masterly performance, and has every appearance of having been originally modelled from nature.

In Exeter Cathedral there is an altar tomb, upon which lies the effigy of bishop Marshall, who died in 1203, dressed in his episcopal robes, with a mitre on his head, his right hand lying upon his breast, with the palm upwards, the fore finger, ring finger, and thumb extended, and the other fingers closed. Near this monument in a low niche, lies the figure of a skeleton, cut in free stone, with the following inscription over it:—“Ista figura docet nos omnes premeditari qualiter ipsa nocet mors quando venit dominari.”

The tomb of bishop Beckington in Wells Cathedral, who died in 1464, has his effigy in alabaster, habited in his episcopal robes; and underneath is a representation of his skeleton.

Footnote 59:

In the centre of the nave of Wells Cathedral there is a large stone that had formerly upon it an effigy in brass, which was generally ascribed to king Ina, the founder of that church.

Footnote 60:

This is one of the earliest specimens we have of the cross-legged monument. It is made of Irish oak, as well the table part, as the effigy. On the pannels are the arms of several of the worthies, and at the foot the arms of France and England, quarterly, which shews these escutcheons to have been painted since the reign of king Henry the fourth. This monument stood entire until the parliamentary army, during the Cromwell usurpation, having garrisoned the city of Gloucester against the king, the soldiers tore it to pieces, which being about to be burned, were bought of them by Sir Humphrey Tracy, of Stanway, and privately laid up until the Restoration, when the pieces were put together, repaired, and ornamented, and again placed in their former situation by Sir Humphrey, who also added a wire screen for their future preservation. There is an engraving of this monument in Sandford’s Genealogical History, page 16, which Rudder, (_History of Gloucester_, p. 126.) calls a noble representation of it.

Gibbon has left us the following account of this prince, (Rom. Hist. vol. 11. p. 32)—“Robert, Duke of Normandy, one of the chiefs of the first crusade, on his father’s death was deprived of the kingdom of England, by his own indolence and the activity of his brother Rufus. The worth of Robert was degraded by an excessive levity and easiness of temper; his cheerfulness seduced him to the indulgence of pleasure, his profuse liberality impoverished the prince and people; his indiscriminate clemency multiplied the number of offenders; and the amiable qualities of a private man, became the essential defects of a sovereign. For the trifling sum of ten thousand marks (the one hundredth part of its present yearly revenue) he mortgaged Normandy during his absence in the first crusade, to the English usurper; but his behaviour in the Holy War, announced in Robert, a reformation of manners, and restored him in some degree to the public esteem.”

There is an engraving of Robert, Duke of Normandy, in Ducarel’s Anglo-Norman Antiq. Plate 5.

The monument of William, Earl of Flanders, son of Robert, Duke of Normandy, as also two of his seals, are engraven in Sandford’s Genealogical Hist. p. 17.

Footnote 61:

The monument of Edmund Crouchback has been very lofty; it was painted, gilt, and inlaid with stained glass. The inside of the canopy has represented the sky with stars, but, by age, is changed into a dull red. On the base, towards the area are the remains of ten knights, armed, with banners, surcoats of armour, and cross-belted, representing, undoubtedly, his expedition to the Holy Land, the number exactly corresponding with what Matthew Paris reports, namely, Edmund and his elder brother, four earls and four knights, of whom some are still discoverable, particularly the Lord Roger Clifford, as were formerly in Waverly’s time, William de Valence and Thomas de Clare.

Footnote 62:

These rules are extracted from the Antiquarian Repertory, vol. ii. p. 124; and from the Introduction to Gough’s “History of Sepulchral Monuments,” p. 115.

Footnote 63:

This account of these monuments is extracted from Gough’s “History of Sepulchral Monuments.”

Footnote 64:

This monument was asserted by Green, in his History of Worcester, to have been a cenotaph, and accordingly the Dean and Chapter had determined on its removal, intending to place it over the supposed remains of the king in the lady chapel. But on opening the tomb on Monday, July the 17th, 1797, the royal remains were found therein in a stone coffin, the internal measure of which from the feet to the top of the excavation hollowed out for the head, was 5 feet 6 inches and a half. The body was doubtless originally placed in the coffin, nearly in the same form, and arrayed in such a robe as the figure on the tomb, with his sword in his left hand, and booted, but it was so much deranged as evidently to shew that it had been disturbed, and that perhaps at its removal from the place of its first interment in the lady chapel, if ever that event had taken place, which seems to have been a controverted point with historians. The most perfect part of the body seemed to be the toes, on some of which the nails were still distinguishable, but of what the dress had originally been composed, could be only matter of conjecture. The influx of people, eager to see the royal remains after an interment of nearly 600 years, was so great as to be the cause of the tomb being closed on the following day.

Footnote 65:

The monument of Walter de Langton, Dean of York, who died in 1279, was the first in that Cathedral that had an inscription upon it. It was destroyed by the Puritans during the Cromwell Usurpation.

Footnote 66:

Coffins formed of a single stone, hollowed with a chissel, are an improvement which has been attributed to the Romans. Sometimes they were of marble. Some contained two or more bodies, others only one, in which case, it was not unusual for them to be made to fit the body, with cavities for the reception of the head and arms, and other protuberances.

The solid stone or marble coffin, often curiously wrought, was in use among the first christians in England, who, in all probability, copied the customs of the Romans, after those conquerors had quitted our island.—Stone coffins were disused in the fifteenth century. None but opulent persons were interred in coffins of this description; the body was wrapped in fine linen, attired in the most honourable vestments, and laid in spices. The coffin was placed no deeper in the ground, than the thickness of a marble slab, or stone to be laid over it, even with the surface of the pavement. The coffin shaped stones which are frequently seen in churches at the present day, have, in general, been the covers of stone coffins.

The leaden coffin was also in use among the Romans, not only for the reception of the body, but in many instances, for the ashes and bones. It was adopted by the christians, and continues in frequent use to the present time, among the more opulent.

Alexander was buried in a golden coffin, by his successor Ptolemy; and glass coffins have been found in England.

The oldest instance, on record, among us, of a coffin made of wood, is that of king Arthur, who was buried in an entire trunk of oak.

It was not till the latter end of the seventeenth or the beginning of the eighteenth century, that coffins became in general use in England. Before that time, there was, in every parish church, a common coffin, in which the corpse was placed and conveyed on a bier, from the residence of the deceased, to the grave; it was then taken out of the coffin and interred. Some of these common coffins yet remain in country churches.

Footnote 67:

The gold noble, or half mark, struck by king Edward the third, in the seventeenth year of his reign, is the first money on which the arms of England appear, namely, three lions passant guardant.

Footnote 68:

The _three_ fleurs de lys were used, on some occasions, much earlier than this, both in France and England. There is an angel of Philip de Valois, coined in 1340, with the _three_ fleurs de lys, which was probably done for the sake of variation, king Edward having then lately taken the arms _semée_ de lys. Le Blanc mentions a charter of Philip, in 1355, with a seal of the arms in like manner. There is also a groat of king John of France, with only _three_ fleurs de lys, though he used them likewise _semée_. But Charles the sixth, who began his reign in 1380, constantly bore the _three_ lys for the arms of France, as they have been continued ever since. As the English kings altered the arms of France, in imitation of the French king, it is most likely that our Henry the fourth who was contemporary with Charles the sixth, began this practice. He did indeed bear the fleurs de lys _semée_, upon his great seal, because it was his predecessor’s, but that he bore the _three_ lys upon other occasions is most likely, for so they are seen at the head of his monument, at Canterbury, and his son Henry, afterwards Henry the fifth, in like manner, bore the _three_ fleurs de lys upon his seal, annexed to an indenture, so early as the sixth year of his father’s reign.

Footnote 69:

The coins of king Henry the sixth, both gold and silver, are supposed to be distinguished from his father’s, by the arched crown, surmounted with the orb and cross, being the first of our kings who appears with an arched crown upon his coins; but upon his great seal he has an open crown, _fleuri_, with small pearls, upon points, between. This is likewise the first time we see the orb with the cross upon the money, though it had been used upon other occasions, by almost all our kings, down from Edward the Confessor. The arched, or close crown, is not of ancient use, except in the empire, and thence, perhaps, called imperial. Some think Edward the third first used it, because he was vicar-general of the empire, and it is said that Henry the fifth had an imperial crown made, but Henry the sixth had certainly the best pretence to it, of any prince in Europe, of his time, being crowned king both of France and England. But why he did not bear it upon his great seal, as well as upon his coin, is not easily resolved any more than that his successor should bear it upon his great seal, and not upon his coins.

FINIS.

● Transcriber’s Notes: ○ Text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores (_italics_). ○ Footnotes have been moved to follow the articles in which they are referenced.