Chapter 76

10.Strutt, in his “Chronicle of England” has given a plate representing a page of this manuscript, and in Astle’s “History of Writing,” there is a plate of the same page, coloured, in imitation of the original.

10.Strutt, in his “Chronicle of England” has given a plate representing a page of this manuscript, and in Astle’s “History of Writing,” there is a plate of the same page, coloured, in imitation of the original.

11.Bede, commonly called the Venerable Bede, was the most learned man of the age in which he lived; he was born at Weremouth, in Northumberland, in the year 672. Both ancient and modern authors have bestowed the highest encomiums upon the learning of this extraordinary man. His works are many, making eight large volumes, in folio, the principal of which is his Ecclesiastical History of the Anglo-Saxons, consisting of five books, from whence the more perfect part of our early history is formed; his other works are the Lives of Saints, Treatises on the Holy Scriptures, and Philosophical Tracts. This great man died at his cell at Jarrow, in the year 735, aged 63.

11.Bede, commonly called the Venerable Bede, was the most learned man of the age in which he lived; he was born at Weremouth, in Northumberland, in the year 672. Both ancient and modern authors have bestowed the highest encomiums upon the learning of this extraordinary man. His works are many, making eight large volumes, in folio, the principal of which is his Ecclesiastical History of the Anglo-Saxons, consisting of five books, from whence the more perfect part of our early history is formed; his other works are the Lives of Saints, Treatises on the Holy Scriptures, and Philosophical Tracts. This great man died at his cell at Jarrow, in the year 735, aged 63.

12.Lydgate was commonly called the Monk of Bury, because born at that place, about the year 1380. After some time spent in the English Universities, he travelled through France and Italy, in which countries he greatly improved himself. In addition to his poetical talents, he is described as being an eloquent rhetorician, an expert mathematician, an acute philosopher, and no mean divine. He is said to have been so much admired by his contemporaries, that they said of him, that his wit was fashioned by the Muses themselves. After his return from France and Italy, he became tutor to the sons of several of the nobility, and for his excellent endowments, was much esteemed and reverenced by them. He wrote a poem, calledThe Life and Death of Hector, some satires, eulogies, and odes, and other learned works in prose. He died in 1440, aged sixty, and was buried in his own convent at Bury. Lydgate is said to have been a disciple of Chaucer.

12.Lydgate was commonly called the Monk of Bury, because born at that place, about the year 1380. After some time spent in the English Universities, he travelled through France and Italy, in which countries he greatly improved himself. In addition to his poetical talents, he is described as being an eloquent rhetorician, an expert mathematician, an acute philosopher, and no mean divine. He is said to have been so much admired by his contemporaries, that they said of him, that his wit was fashioned by the Muses themselves. After his return from France and Italy, he became tutor to the sons of several of the nobility, and for his excellent endowments, was much esteemed and reverenced by them. He wrote a poem, calledThe Life and Death of Hector, some satires, eulogies, and odes, and other learned works in prose. He died in 1440, aged sixty, and was buried in his own convent at Bury. Lydgate is said to have been a disciple of Chaucer.

13.Leonard Aretin, the disciple of Chrysoloras, was a linguist, an orator, and an historian; the secretary of four successive Popes; and Chancellor of the Republic of Florence, where he died in 1444, aged seventy-five. He added a Supplement to Livy on the Punic War, and wrote the History of Italy, with other valuable works.

13.Leonard Aretin, the disciple of Chrysoloras, was a linguist, an orator, and an historian; the secretary of four successive Popes; and Chancellor of the Republic of Florence, where he died in 1444, aged seventy-five. He added a Supplement to Livy on the Punic War, and wrote the History of Italy, with other valuable works.

14.Emanuel Chrysoloras was one of the envoys sent by the Greek Emperor Manuel, at the end of the fourteenth century, to implore the compassion of the Western Princes. He was not only conspicuous for the nobleness of his birth but also for the extent of his learning. After visiting the courts of France and England, in furtherance of his mission, he was invited to assume the office of a Professor, and Florence had the honour of this invitation, as it had had a few years previously that of the first Greek Professor Leo Pilatus, whose mind was stored with a treasure of Greek learning, with whom history and fable, philosophy and grammar, were alike familiar, and who first read the Poems of Homer in the Schools of Florence. Chrysoloras may be considered as the founder of the Greek language in Italy, and his knowledge not only of the Greek, but of the Latin tongue, surpassed the expectation of the Florentine republic. At the same time and place, the Latin classics were explained by John of Ravenna, the domestic pupil of the celebrated Petrarch. The Italians, who illustrated their age and country, were formed in this double school, and Florence became the fruitful seminary of Greek and Roman erudition. Chrysoloras was recalled by the Emperor from the college to the court, but he afterwards taught at Pavia and Rome with equal industry and applause. He died at Constance on a public mission from the Emperor to the council.Gibbon’s Hist.vol.12.p.126.

14.Emanuel Chrysoloras was one of the envoys sent by the Greek Emperor Manuel, at the end of the fourteenth century, to implore the compassion of the Western Princes. He was not only conspicuous for the nobleness of his birth but also for the extent of his learning. After visiting the courts of France and England, in furtherance of his mission, he was invited to assume the office of a Professor, and Florence had the honour of this invitation, as it had had a few years previously that of the first Greek Professor Leo Pilatus, whose mind was stored with a treasure of Greek learning, with whom history and fable, philosophy and grammar, were alike familiar, and who first read the Poems of Homer in the Schools of Florence. Chrysoloras may be considered as the founder of the Greek language in Italy, and his knowledge not only of the Greek, but of the Latin tongue, surpassed the expectation of the Florentine republic. At the same time and place, the Latin classics were explained by John of Ravenna, the domestic pupil of the celebrated Petrarch. The Italians, who illustrated their age and country, were formed in this double school, and Florence became the fruitful seminary of Greek and Roman erudition. Chrysoloras was recalled by the Emperor from the college to the court, but he afterwards taught at Pavia and Rome with equal industry and applause. He died at Constance on a public mission from the Emperor to the council.Gibbon’s Hist.vol.12.p.126.

15.Laurentius Valla, was a native of Placenza, where he was born in 1415; he revived the Latin language from gothic barbarity, but he was a rigorous critic. He fell under the displeasure of the Church of Rome, for the freedom with which he hazarded his opinions respecting some of its doctrines, and he was condemned to be burnt, but was saved by Alphonsus, king of Naples. Pope Nicholas the fifth, who was himself one of the greatest encouragers of learning of his time, and who highly respected the talents of Valla, invited him to Rome, and gave him a pension.—This Pope, whose pursuits were in direct association with our present subject, from a plebeian origin, raised himself by his virtue and his learning to the highest honours of the Church. The character of the man prevailed over the interest of the Pontiff, and he sharpened those weapons which were soon pointed against the religion of Rome. He had been the friend of the most eminent scholars of the age, and after his elevation to the chair ofSt.Peter, he became their patron. Under Pope Nicholas, the influence of the Holy See pervaded Christendom, and he exerted that influence in the search, not of benefices, but of books. From the ruins of the Byzantine libraries, from the darkest monasteries of Germany and Britain, he collected the dusty manuscripts of the writers of antiquity; and whenever the original could not be removed, a faithful copy was transcribed and transmitted for his use. The Vatican was daily replenished with precious furniture, and such was his industry, that in a reign of eight years, he formed a library of five thousand volumes. To his munificence the Latin world was indebted for the versions of Xenophon, Diodorus, Polybius, Thucydides, Herodotus, and Appian; of Strabo’s Geography, of the Iliad, of the more valuable works of Plato and Aristotle, of Ptolemy, and Theophrastus, and of the Fathers of the Greek Church.

15.Laurentius Valla, was a native of Placenza, where he was born in 1415; he revived the Latin language from gothic barbarity, but he was a rigorous critic. He fell under the displeasure of the Church of Rome, for the freedom with which he hazarded his opinions respecting some of its doctrines, and he was condemned to be burnt, but was saved by Alphonsus, king of Naples. Pope Nicholas the fifth, who was himself one of the greatest encouragers of learning of his time, and who highly respected the talents of Valla, invited him to Rome, and gave him a pension.—This Pope, whose pursuits were in direct association with our present subject, from a plebeian origin, raised himself by his virtue and his learning to the highest honours of the Church. The character of the man prevailed over the interest of the Pontiff, and he sharpened those weapons which were soon pointed against the religion of Rome. He had been the friend of the most eminent scholars of the age, and after his elevation to the chair ofSt.Peter, he became their patron. Under Pope Nicholas, the influence of the Holy See pervaded Christendom, and he exerted that influence in the search, not of benefices, but of books. From the ruins of the Byzantine libraries, from the darkest monasteries of Germany and Britain, he collected the dusty manuscripts of the writers of antiquity; and whenever the original could not be removed, a faithful copy was transcribed and transmitted for his use. The Vatican was daily replenished with precious furniture, and such was his industry, that in a reign of eight years, he formed a library of five thousand volumes. To his munificence the Latin world was indebted for the versions of Xenophon, Diodorus, Polybius, Thucydides, Herodotus, and Appian; of Strabo’s Geography, of the Iliad, of the more valuable works of Plato and Aristotle, of Ptolemy, and Theophrastus, and of the Fathers of the Greek Church.

16.For an account of the following Manuscript Libraries in England, see Savage’s Librarian, 3 vols. London, 1808-1810—namely, that of the British Museum, invol.1.p.26; of the Royal Society,p.71; of the Heralds Office,p.73; of the Society of Antiquaries,p.129; of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s at Lambeth Palace,p.133; of Lincoln’s Inn, p. 183, 225; of the Middle Temple,p.273; of the Inner Temple,vol.2.p.131; of the Lansdown Collection of Manuscripts,vol.1.p.34, andvol.3.p.27, and of the Cottonian Manuscripts,vol.3.p.31.The curious reader who is interested in the history of the public records of his country, will find in the same volumes, the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons on the State of the Records, invol.1.p.17, &c.—an account of the Records in the Tower of London,vol.2.p.34, &c. of those in the Rolls Chapel, ibid.p.185, &c. and of those in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey,vol.3.p.41, &c.

16.For an account of the following Manuscript Libraries in England, see Savage’s Librarian, 3 vols. London, 1808-1810—namely, that of the British Museum, invol.1.p.26; of the Royal Society,p.71; of the Heralds Office,p.73; of the Society of Antiquaries,p.129; of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s at Lambeth Palace,p.133; of Lincoln’s Inn, p. 183, 225; of the Middle Temple,p.273; of the Inner Temple,vol.2.p.131; of the Lansdown Collection of Manuscripts,vol.1.p.34, andvol.3.p.27, and of the Cottonian Manuscripts,vol.3.p.31.

The curious reader who is interested in the history of the public records of his country, will find in the same volumes, the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons on the State of the Records, invol.1.p.17, &c.—an account of the Records in the Tower of London,vol.2.p.34, &c. of those in the Rolls Chapel, ibid.p.185, &c. and of those in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey,vol.3.p.41, &c.

17.VideSerjeant Heywood’s Vindication of Mr. Fox’s History of James the Second,p.397.

17.VideSerjeant Heywood’s Vindication of Mr. Fox’s History of James the Second,p.397.

18.Fuller’s Worthies,p.317.

18.Fuller’s Worthies,p.317.

19.There is a small book, printed in black letter, containing an account of the treatment and trial of Anne Askew, which contains many curious particulars.—She was the daughter of Sir William Askew, of Kelsay, in the county of Lincoln, where she was born about 1520. She had a learned education, and while young was married to a person of the name of Kyme, much against her inclination. On account of some harsh treatment from her husband, she went to the Court of Henry the Eighth to sue for a separation, where she was greatly taken notice of by those ladies who were attached to the Reformation; in consequence of which, she was arrested, and having confessed her religious principles, was committed to Newgate. She was first racked with savage cruelty in the Tower, and then burnt in Smithfield, in 1546, in company with her tutor, and two other persons of the same faith. From her letters and other pieces in Fox and Strype, it appears she was an accomplished, as well as a pious, woman.

19.There is a small book, printed in black letter, containing an account of the treatment and trial of Anne Askew, which contains many curious particulars.—She was the daughter of Sir William Askew, of Kelsay, in the county of Lincoln, where she was born about 1520. She had a learned education, and while young was married to a person of the name of Kyme, much against her inclination. On account of some harsh treatment from her husband, she went to the Court of Henry the Eighth to sue for a separation, where she was greatly taken notice of by those ladies who were attached to the Reformation; in consequence of which, she was arrested, and having confessed her religious principles, was committed to Newgate. She was first racked with savage cruelty in the Tower, and then burnt in Smithfield, in 1546, in company with her tutor, and two other persons of the same faith. From her letters and other pieces in Fox and Strype, it appears she was an accomplished, as well as a pious, woman.

20.Burnet’s Reformation,vol.1.p.325;vol.2.p.382.

20.Burnet’s Reformation,vol.1.p.325;vol.2.p.382.

21.Collier’s Eccl. Hist.vol.2.p.591.—Murden’s State Papers,p.9, 101.

21.Collier’s Eccl. Hist.vol.2.p.591.—Murden’s State Papers,p.9, 101.

22.Collier’s Eccl. Hist.vol.2.p.139.—Murden’s State Papers,p.452.

22.Collier’s Eccl. Hist.vol.2.p.139.—Murden’s State Papers,p.452.

23.Observations on Ancient Statutes,p.496,note.

23.Observations on Ancient Statutes,p.496,note.

24.State Trials,vol.1.p.199.

24.State Trials,vol.1.p.199.

25.Observations on Statutes,p.495.

25.Observations on Statutes,p.495.

26.State Trials,vol.1.p.221.

26.State Trials,vol.1.p.221.

27.Observations on Statutes,p.92.

27.Observations on Statutes,p.92.

28.State Trials,vol.3.p.99.

28.State Trials,vol.3.p.99.

29.The Pandects (1.xlviii.tit.xviii.) contain the sentiments of the most celebrated civilians on the subject of torture. They strictly confine it to slaves.

29.The Pandects (1.xlviii.tit.xviii.) contain the sentiments of the most celebrated civilians on the subject of torture. They strictly confine it to slaves.

30.The Citizens of Athens could not be put to the rack, unless it was for high treason. The torture was used within thirty days after condemnation. There was no preparatory torture. In regard to the Romans, the third and fourth lawde Majestate, by Julius Cæsar, shews that birth, dignity, and the military profession exempted people from the rack, except in cases of high treason.—Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws,vol.1.p.132.

30.The Citizens of Athens could not be put to the rack, unless it was for high treason. The torture was used within thirty days after condemnation. There was no preparatory torture. In regard to the Romans, the third and fourth lawde Majestate, by Julius Cæsar, shews that birth, dignity, and the military profession exempted people from the rack, except in cases of high treason.—Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws,vol.1.p.132.

31.Archadius Charisius is the oldest lawyer quoted in the Pandects to justify the universal practice of torture in all cases of treason; but this maxim of tyranny, which is admitted by Ammianus with the most respectful terror, is enforced by several laws of the successors of Constantine.—Gibbon’s Rom. Hist.vol.3.p.81.

31.Archadius Charisius is the oldest lawyer quoted in the Pandects to justify the universal practice of torture in all cases of treason; but this maxim of tyranny, which is admitted by Ammianus with the most respectful terror, is enforced by several laws of the successors of Constantine.—Gibbon’s Rom. Hist.vol.3.p.81.

32.There is an engraving of Sir Thomas in the collection of Holbein Heads, published by Mr. Chamberlaine.An original picture of him, which has been frequently copied, is in the collection of the Earl of Romney. It is nearly a profile, and bears a strong resemblance to Holbein’s drawing.There is a print of Sir Thomas Wyat, from an engraving on wood, after a painting by Holbein; it is the frontispiece to the book of verses, written on his death, by Leland, entitled “Næniæ in Mortem Thomæ Viati Equitis incomparabilis,” an Elegy on the death of Sir Thomas Wyat,Knt.London, 1542,quarto. This book was reprinted by Hearne, at the beginning of the second volume of Leland’s Itinerary. Under the head is the following inscription:—“Holbenus nitida pingendi maximus arte,”Effigiem expressit graphice, sed nullus Apelles“Exprimet ingenium felix, animumque Viati.”This print has been copied by Michael Burghers and Mr. Tyson.Grangeri.110.

32.There is an engraving of Sir Thomas in the collection of Holbein Heads, published by Mr. Chamberlaine.

An original picture of him, which has been frequently copied, is in the collection of the Earl of Romney. It is nearly a profile, and bears a strong resemblance to Holbein’s drawing.

There is a print of Sir Thomas Wyat, from an engraving on wood, after a painting by Holbein; it is the frontispiece to the book of verses, written on his death, by Leland, entitled “Næniæ in Mortem Thomæ Viati Equitis incomparabilis,” an Elegy on the death of Sir Thomas Wyat,Knt.London, 1542,quarto. This book was reprinted by Hearne, at the beginning of the second volume of Leland’s Itinerary. Under the head is the following inscription:—

“Holbenus nitida pingendi maximus arte,”Effigiem expressit graphice, sed nullus Apelles“Exprimet ingenium felix, animumque Viati.”

“Holbenus nitida pingendi maximus arte,”Effigiem expressit graphice, sed nullus Apelles“Exprimet ingenium felix, animumque Viati.”

“Holbenus nitida pingendi maximus arte,”Effigiem expressit graphice, sed nullus Apelles“Exprimet ingenium felix, animumque Viati.”

“Holbenus nitida pingendi maximus arte,

”Effigiem expressit graphice, sed nullus Apelles

“Exprimet ingenium felix, animumque Viati.”

This print has been copied by Michael Burghers and Mr. Tyson.Grangeri.110.

33.The first printed Poetical Miscellany, in the English language, is the Collection of Poems, edited and published by Tottel, entitled “Songes and Sonnettes of Surrey, Wyat, and of uncertain Auctors, London, 1557.”—Another edition, 1565—others in 1574, 1585, 1587. The last edition was edited by Dr. George Sewell, in 1717.—This Dr. Sewell was a physician in London; he received his early education at Eton, which he afterwards completed at Cambridge, where he took the degree of Bachelor of Physic in 1709. From thence he went to Leyden, where he studied under the celebrated Boerhaave. Not being successful in the metropolis, he removed to Hampstead, where he died on the8thof February, 1726. As an author he possessed a considerable share of genius, and wrote in concert with several of his contemporaries, particularly in the Spectator and Tatler; he was principally concerned in the ninth volume of the former, and in the fifth of the latter, as he was also in a translation of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and an edition of Shakespeare’s Poems. He was the author of a Tragedy, entitled “Sir Walter Raleigh,” published at London in 1719, and also of another, which he left unfinished, entitled “King Richard the First,” the fragments of which were printed in 1728.

33.The first printed Poetical Miscellany, in the English language, is the Collection of Poems, edited and published by Tottel, entitled “Songes and Sonnettes of Surrey, Wyat, and of uncertain Auctors, London, 1557.”—Another edition, 1565—others in 1574, 1585, 1587. The last edition was edited by Dr. George Sewell, in 1717.—This Dr. Sewell was a physician in London; he received his early education at Eton, which he afterwards completed at Cambridge, where he took the degree of Bachelor of Physic in 1709. From thence he went to Leyden, where he studied under the celebrated Boerhaave. Not being successful in the metropolis, he removed to Hampstead, where he died on the8thof February, 1726. As an author he possessed a considerable share of genius, and wrote in concert with several of his contemporaries, particularly in the Spectator and Tatler; he was principally concerned in the ninth volume of the former, and in the fifth of the latter, as he was also in a translation of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and an edition of Shakespeare’s Poems. He was the author of a Tragedy, entitled “Sir Walter Raleigh,” published at London in 1719, and also of another, which he left unfinished, entitled “King Richard the First,” the fragments of which were printed in 1728.

34.Melancthon was born at Brette, a village of the Palatinate, on the16thof February, 1497. In his childhood he made an astonishing progress in the acquisition of languages. Luther, and his doctrines, appeared about this time, and Melancthon stood forward as one of their most strenuous supporters; indeed the Lutheran system was in a great measure planned by him, and the famous instrument by which it was publicly declared, called the Confession of Augsburg, was the production of his pen. Melancthon was the intimate friend of Erasmus, and Erasmus the patron of Holbein. This connection will account for his appearance in a Collection of Portraits, drawn by Holbein, of the principal personages in the Court of Henry the Eighth, though Melancthon never was in this country. An engraving of him is among the Holbein Heads, published by Mr. Chamberlaine, and there is a full-length portrait of this great Reformer, with a fac-simile of his writing, in his Life, published by theRev.F. A.Cox, London, 1815, 8vo.

34.Melancthon was born at Brette, a village of the Palatinate, on the16thof February, 1497. In his childhood he made an astonishing progress in the acquisition of languages. Luther, and his doctrines, appeared about this time, and Melancthon stood forward as one of their most strenuous supporters; indeed the Lutheran system was in a great measure planned by him, and the famous instrument by which it was publicly declared, called the Confession of Augsburg, was the production of his pen. Melancthon was the intimate friend of Erasmus, and Erasmus the patron of Holbein. This connection will account for his appearance in a Collection of Portraits, drawn by Holbein, of the principal personages in the Court of Henry the Eighth, though Melancthon never was in this country. An engraving of him is among the Holbein Heads, published by Mr. Chamberlaine, and there is a full-length portrait of this great Reformer, with a fac-simile of his writing, in his Life, published by theRev.F. A.Cox, London, 1815, 8vo.

35.Several of these were men remarkable for their talents and learning: among whom were Petyt, Tyrrel, Sir Robert Filmer, Dr. Brady, Prynne, Rymer, &c. &c.Petyt and Prynne were keepers of the Records in the Tower; and Rymer, who was the king’s Historiographer, had a warrant not only to search the Records in every office in the kingdom, but to make copies of such as he should select for publication. How diligent he was in using this authority is evident from the invaluable collection of Records, &c. published by him, and from a large collection of others in manuscript, now in the Museum.Petyt makes a direct charge, and not unfounded, against Prynne, for an intended omission of a reference to the Rolls of Parliament (2dHen.V.p.2.No.10.) in the Abridgment of the Rolls made by Sir Robert Cotton, and printed by Prynne.Even Sir Robert Atkyns, a man eminently distinguished for his integrity and learning, as well as for his deep research into the ancient History of Parliament, who had been a Judge of the Common Pleas, and was afterwards Chief Baron of the Exchequer and Speaker of the House of Lords, in his learned and elaborate argument in the year 1680, in the case of an information by the Attorney General against Williams, Speaker of the House of Commons, in asserting the antiquity of that House, fell into some mistakes, from not having resorted to the original records. He states, and insists much on it, that the Speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Thomas Hungerford, 51 EdwardIII.was Speakerof the Parliament; whereas the words in the Record are,“Monsieur Thomas de Hungerford, Chivaler, q’i avoit les Paroles pur les Communes d’ Engleterre.”Rolls of Parl.vol.ii.p.374,a.In the first of Richard the Second, the Speaker, Sir Robert says again, was termed the Speakerof the Parliament; the words in the Record are, “Mons. Pere de la Mare Chivaler q’avoit les Paroles de Par la Commune.”—Vol.iii.p.5, 6.The same with respect to Sir John Bussey, 20 RichardII.The words in the Record are,“les Communes presenterent Mons. John Bussey pour leur Parlour.”—Page 338,a.—339,b.

35.Several of these were men remarkable for their talents and learning: among whom were Petyt, Tyrrel, Sir Robert Filmer, Dr. Brady, Prynne, Rymer, &c. &c.

Petyt and Prynne were keepers of the Records in the Tower; and Rymer, who was the king’s Historiographer, had a warrant not only to search the Records in every office in the kingdom, but to make copies of such as he should select for publication. How diligent he was in using this authority is evident from the invaluable collection of Records, &c. published by him, and from a large collection of others in manuscript, now in the Museum.

Petyt makes a direct charge, and not unfounded, against Prynne, for an intended omission of a reference to the Rolls of Parliament (2dHen.V.p.2.No.10.) in the Abridgment of the Rolls made by Sir Robert Cotton, and printed by Prynne.

Even Sir Robert Atkyns, a man eminently distinguished for his integrity and learning, as well as for his deep research into the ancient History of Parliament, who had been a Judge of the Common Pleas, and was afterwards Chief Baron of the Exchequer and Speaker of the House of Lords, in his learned and elaborate argument in the year 1680, in the case of an information by the Attorney General against Williams, Speaker of the House of Commons, in asserting the antiquity of that House, fell into some mistakes, from not having resorted to the original records. He states, and insists much on it, that the Speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Thomas Hungerford, 51 EdwardIII.was Speakerof the Parliament; whereas the words in the Record are,“Monsieur Thomas de Hungerford, Chivaler, q’i avoit les Paroles pur les Communes d’ Engleterre.”Rolls of Parl.vol.ii.p.374,a.In the first of Richard the Second, the Speaker, Sir Robert says again, was termed the Speakerof the Parliament; the words in the Record are, “Mons. Pere de la Mare Chivaler q’avoit les Paroles de Par la Commune.”—Vol.iii.p.5, 6.

The same with respect to Sir John Bussey, 20 RichardII.The words in the Record are,“les Communes presenterent Mons. John Bussey pour leur Parlour.”—Page 338,a.—339,b.

36.In 1766, the late Thomas Astle,Esq.was consulted by the Sub-Committee of the House of Lords, concerning the printing of the Rolls of Parliament, and in 1768, on the death of Mr. Blyke, Mr. Astle introduced his father-in-law, theRev.Philip Morant, author of the History of Essex, to succeed that gentleman in preparing the Rolls for the press. Mr. Morant died in November, 1770, after proceeding in them as far as the16thof Henry the fourth, when Mr. Astle was appointed by the House of Lords to carry on the work, which he completed in 1775. They are printed in six volumes,folio.

36.In 1766, the late Thomas Astle,Esq.was consulted by the Sub-Committee of the House of Lords, concerning the printing of the Rolls of Parliament, and in 1768, on the death of Mr. Blyke, Mr. Astle introduced his father-in-law, theRev.Philip Morant, author of the History of Essex, to succeed that gentleman in preparing the Rolls for the press. Mr. Morant died in November, 1770, after proceeding in them as far as the16thof Henry the fourth, when Mr. Astle was appointed by the House of Lords to carry on the work, which he completed in 1775. They are printed in six volumes,folio.

37.Some reliance was placed by his Lordship on the Treatise“de Modo tenendi Parliamentum;”the authority of which, if not entirely destroyed by Prynne, will not at least in future have much weight.—Prynne’s Animadversions on 4 Inst.p.1. top.8. andp.331.

37.Some reliance was placed by his Lordship on the Treatise“de Modo tenendi Parliamentum;”the authority of which, if not entirely destroyed by Prynne, will not at least in future have much weight.—Prynne’s Animadversions on 4 Inst.p.1. top.8. andp.331.

38.In the Parliament of the18thof Edward the first there were no Citizens or Burgesses. There is a bundle of writs yet extant, by which this Parliament was summoned. They are directed to the sheriffs of several or most of the counties of England, by which two or three Knights were directed to be chosen for each county, and accordingly the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge and Huntingdon, and Cumberland returned each of themthreeKnights, and the other counties two each. This Parliament gave the King a fifteenth of all their moveables as appears by the account of the same which is entered upon the Great Roll of the23dof that king, in which account we have the style of this Parliament, namely, “The account of the fifteenth, granted to the king in his18thyear, by the Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Priors, Earls, Barons, andall others of the kingdom, assessed, collected, and levied,” &c.We may here observe that the two or three Knights, chosen by the several counties, did represent those counties, and according to the form of the writ, consulted upon and consented to this grant of a fifteenth.So also in the22dEdward the First there were neither Citizens nor Burgesses summoned to the Parliament of that year. On the8thof October the king issued writs directed to every sheriff in England to cause two discreet Knights to be chosen for each county, with full powers, “so that for defect of such powers, the business might not remain undone.” And on the following day the king issued other writs to the sheriffs to cause to be elected two knights more, to be added to the former two, making four for each county, and these four Knights for each county, and the Earls, Barons, and Great Men, on the day of their meeting gave the king a tenth part of all their goods.

38.In the Parliament of the18thof Edward the first there were no Citizens or Burgesses. There is a bundle of writs yet extant, by which this Parliament was summoned. They are directed to the sheriffs of several or most of the counties of England, by which two or three Knights were directed to be chosen for each county, and accordingly the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge and Huntingdon, and Cumberland returned each of themthreeKnights, and the other counties two each. This Parliament gave the King a fifteenth of all their moveables as appears by the account of the same which is entered upon the Great Roll of the23dof that king, in which account we have the style of this Parliament, namely, “The account of the fifteenth, granted to the king in his18thyear, by the Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Priors, Earls, Barons, andall others of the kingdom, assessed, collected, and levied,” &c.

We may here observe that the two or three Knights, chosen by the several counties, did represent those counties, and according to the form of the writ, consulted upon and consented to this grant of a fifteenth.

So also in the22dEdward the First there were neither Citizens nor Burgesses summoned to the Parliament of that year. On the8thof October the king issued writs directed to every sheriff in England to cause two discreet Knights to be chosen for each county, with full powers, “so that for defect of such powers, the business might not remain undone.” And on the following day the king issued other writs to the sheriffs to cause to be elected two knights more, to be added to the former two, making four for each county, and these four Knights for each county, and the Earls, Barons, and Great Men, on the day of their meeting gave the king a tenth part of all their goods.

39.This was only a grant of forty shillings for every Knight’s fee.—See Rolls of Parliament,vol.2,p.112,a.hereinafter referred to in 14 of EdwardIII.

39.This was only a grant of forty shillings for every Knight’s fee.—See Rolls of Parliament,vol.2,p.112,a.hereinafter referred to in 14 of EdwardIII.

40.Proxies in Parliament is a privilege appropriated to the Lords only; the first instance of a Proxy that occurs in the History of the English Parliament, is in the reign of Edward the first.In a Parliament at Westminster in the reign of Edward the second, the bishops of Durham and Carlisle were allowed to send their Proxies to Parliament.In the early period of the History of Parliament, the Lords were not obliged to make Barons only their Proxies as the custom now is; the Bishops and Parliamentary Abbots usually gave their letters of proxy to Prebendaries, Parsons, and Canons; but since the first year of king Henry the eighth, there appear in the journals no Proxies but such as were Lords of Parliament.In the35thof king Edward the third, 1360, the following Peeres were summoned by writ to Parliament, to appear there by their Proxies, namely, Mary, Countess of Norfolk; Eleanor, Countess of Ormond; Anna, Baroness Despenser; Philippa, Countess of March; Joanna, Baroness Fitzwalter; Agneta, Countess of Pembroke; Mary deSt.Paul, Countess of Pembroke; Margaret, Baroness de Roos; Matilda, Countess of Oxford; Catherine, Countess of Athol. These ladies were calledad colloquium et tractatumby their Proxies.

40.Proxies in Parliament is a privilege appropriated to the Lords only; the first instance of a Proxy that occurs in the History of the English Parliament, is in the reign of Edward the first.

In a Parliament at Westminster in the reign of Edward the second, the bishops of Durham and Carlisle were allowed to send their Proxies to Parliament.

In the early period of the History of Parliament, the Lords were not obliged to make Barons only their Proxies as the custom now is; the Bishops and Parliamentary Abbots usually gave their letters of proxy to Prebendaries, Parsons, and Canons; but since the first year of king Henry the eighth, there appear in the journals no Proxies but such as were Lords of Parliament.

In the35thof king Edward the third, 1360, the following Peeres were summoned by writ to Parliament, to appear there by their Proxies, namely, Mary, Countess of Norfolk; Eleanor, Countess of Ormond; Anna, Baroness Despenser; Philippa, Countess of March; Joanna, Baroness Fitzwalter; Agneta, Countess of Pembroke; Mary deSt.Paul, Countess of Pembroke; Margaret, Baroness de Roos; Matilda, Countess of Oxford; Catherine, Countess of Athol. These ladies were calledad colloquium et tractatumby their Proxies.

41.The club was in use at the Norman Conquest, and in the succeeding ages.St.Louis had a band of Guards armed with clubs, and was himself very dextrous in the use of it.Pennant, in describing the customs of the ancient Bards and Minstrels of Wales, says, that the lowest of the musical tribe was theDatceiniad pen pastwn, or he that sung to the sound of his club, being ignorant of every other kind of instrument. When he was permitted to be introduced, he was obliged to stand in the middle of the hall, and sing hiscowyddorawdl, beating time, and playing the symphony with hispastwnor club; but if there was a professor of music present, his leave must be first obtained before he presumed to entertain the company with this species of melody. Wherever he came he must act as a menial servant to the bard or minstrel.

41.The club was in use at the Norman Conquest, and in the succeeding ages.St.Louis had a band of Guards armed with clubs, and was himself very dextrous in the use of it.

Pennant, in describing the customs of the ancient Bards and Minstrels of Wales, says, that the lowest of the musical tribe was theDatceiniad pen pastwn, or he that sung to the sound of his club, being ignorant of every other kind of instrument. When he was permitted to be introduced, he was obliged to stand in the middle of the hall, and sing hiscowyddorawdl, beating time, and playing the symphony with hispastwnor club; but if there was a professor of music present, his leave must be first obtained before he presumed to entertain the company with this species of melody. Wherever he came he must act as a menial servant to the bard or minstrel.

42.Among the Romans it was not infamous to be beaten with a stick.

42.Among the Romans it was not infamous to be beaten with a stick.

43.They had only the club and buckler.

43.They had only the club and buckler.

44.Nennius lived in the ninth century, and is said to have left behind him several treatises, of which all that has been published is the history, which was printed for the first time in Dr. Gale’s Collection of British Historians, published at Oxford in 1687 and 1691, in 2vols.folio. Leland mentions an ancient copy of Nennius’s history, which he says he borrowed from Thomas Solme, Secretary for the French language to king Henry the eighth, in the margin of which were the additions ofSam. Beaulanius, orBritannus. He has transcribed several of these marginal annotations, which as it appears, were afterwards inserted in the body of the history, and were printed in that manner by Dr. Gale. The Doctor in his notes, mentions Beaulanius as the Scholiast on the copy which he used, but Leland has a great many other things, as extracts out of Beaulanius, which Dr. Gale does not mention to be only in the Scholion. There is also in the Bodleian Library a manuscript of Nennius apparently nearly 600 years old, in which the prefaces and all the interpolations, which Leland says are by Beaulanius, are wanting.Professor Bertram, of Copenhagen, published in the year 1757, “Britannicarum gentium Historiæ Antiquæ Scriptores tres; Ricardus Corinensis, Gildas Badonicus, Nennius Banchorensis: recensuit, notisque et indice auxit Carolus Bertramus, S. A. Lond. Soc. &c. Havniæ, 1757.” 8vo. The Professor followed Dr. Gale’s edition of Gildas and Nennius, but in the latter he has distinguished the interpolations of Beaulanius from the genuine text. Mr. Gough, (Brit. Topogr.vol.1.p.15.) mentions Mr. Evan Evans having been long preparing a new edition of Nennius, from the Bodleian and other manuscripts.

44.Nennius lived in the ninth century, and is said to have left behind him several treatises, of which all that has been published is the history, which was printed for the first time in Dr. Gale’s Collection of British Historians, published at Oxford in 1687 and 1691, in 2vols.folio. Leland mentions an ancient copy of Nennius’s history, which he says he borrowed from Thomas Solme, Secretary for the French language to king Henry the eighth, in the margin of which were the additions ofSam. Beaulanius, orBritannus. He has transcribed several of these marginal annotations, which as it appears, were afterwards inserted in the body of the history, and were printed in that manner by Dr. Gale. The Doctor in his notes, mentions Beaulanius as the Scholiast on the copy which he used, but Leland has a great many other things, as extracts out of Beaulanius, which Dr. Gale does not mention to be only in the Scholion. There is also in the Bodleian Library a manuscript of Nennius apparently nearly 600 years old, in which the prefaces and all the interpolations, which Leland says are by Beaulanius, are wanting.

Professor Bertram, of Copenhagen, published in the year 1757, “Britannicarum gentium Historiæ Antiquæ Scriptores tres; Ricardus Corinensis, Gildas Badonicus, Nennius Banchorensis: recensuit, notisque et indice auxit Carolus Bertramus, S. A. Lond. Soc. &c. Havniæ, 1757.” 8vo. The Professor followed Dr. Gale’s edition of Gildas and Nennius, but in the latter he has distinguished the interpolations of Beaulanius from the genuine text. Mr. Gough, (Brit. Topogr.vol.1.p.15.) mentions Mr. Evan Evans having been long preparing a new edition of Nennius, from the Bodleian and other manuscripts.

45.Cambrian Register, 1795,p.947.

45.Cambrian Register, 1795,p.947.

46.In 1670, Milton published his History of England, comprising the whole fable of Geoffrey, and continued to the Norman Invasion. Why he should have given the first part, which he seems not to have believed, and which is universally rejected, it is difficult to conjecture. The style is harsh, but it has something of rough vigour, which perhaps may often strike, though it cannot please. On this history, the licenser fixed his claws, and before he would transmit it to the press, tore out several parts. Some censures of the Saxon Monks were taken away, lest they should be applied to the modern Clergy; and a character of the Long Parliament and Assembly of Divines, was excluded; of which the Author gave a copy to the Earl of Anglesea, and which being afterwards published, has been since inserted in its proper place.—Johnson’s Lives of the Poets, Art. Milton.

46.In 1670, Milton published his History of England, comprising the whole fable of Geoffrey, and continued to the Norman Invasion. Why he should have given the first part, which he seems not to have believed, and which is universally rejected, it is difficult to conjecture. The style is harsh, but it has something of rough vigour, which perhaps may often strike, though it cannot please. On this history, the licenser fixed his claws, and before he would transmit it to the press, tore out several parts. Some censures of the Saxon Monks were taken away, lest they should be applied to the modern Clergy; and a character of the Long Parliament and Assembly of Divines, was excluded; of which the Author gave a copy to the Earl of Anglesea, and which being afterwards published, has been since inserted in its proper place.—Johnson’s Lives of the Poets, Art. Milton.

47.Parkhurst’s Heb. Lex. 271.

47.Parkhurst’s Heb. Lex. 271.

48.The practice of tattooing is of great antiquity, and has been common to numerous nations in Turkey, Asia, the Southern parts of Europe, and perhaps to a great portion of the inhabitants of the earth. It is still retained among some of the Moorish tribes, who are, probably, descendants of those who, formerly, were subjected to the Christians of Africa, and who to avoid paying taxes, like the Moors, thus imprinted crosses upon their skins, that they might pass for Christians. This custom, which originally might serve to distinguish tribes by their religion, or from each other, became afterwards a mode of decoration that was habitually retained, when all remembrance of its origin was effaced.It may be inferred that the Canaanites and the other nations of the East, were in the habit of tattooing their skins, because Moses, (Levit.xix, 28.) expressly enjoins the Israelites not to imprint any marks upon their bodies, in imitation of the heathens.The ancient inhabitants of the British Islands, painted their skins in various grotesque figures, with the juice of woad. This custom of tattooing was in use both by the Britons and their first invaders, the Belgæ, and I believe it will be found, that the warriors of all those nations which practised tattooing, invariably threw off their garments in the hour of battle. The name of Picts, is said, though erroneously, to have been given by the Romans to the Caledonians, who possessed the East coast of Scotland, from their painting their bodies. This circumstance has made some imagine that the Picts were of British extraction, and a different race of men from the Scots. That more of the Britons who fled northward, from the oppression and tyranny of the Romans, settled in the low lands of Scotland, than among the Scots of the mountains, may be easily imagined, from the very nature of the country. It was these people who introduced painting among the Picts, From this circumstance, some antiquaries affirm, proceeded the name of the latter, to distinguish them from the Scots, who never had that art among them, and from the Britons, who discontinued the practice of tattooing after the Roman conquest.The inhabitants of the South Sea Islands, at this day, paint upon their bodies various grotesque figures, for the purpose of striking terror into their enemies, in the day of battle.J. S.

48.The practice of tattooing is of great antiquity, and has been common to numerous nations in Turkey, Asia, the Southern parts of Europe, and perhaps to a great portion of the inhabitants of the earth. It is still retained among some of the Moorish tribes, who are, probably, descendants of those who, formerly, were subjected to the Christians of Africa, and who to avoid paying taxes, like the Moors, thus imprinted crosses upon their skins, that they might pass for Christians. This custom, which originally might serve to distinguish tribes by their religion, or from each other, became afterwards a mode of decoration that was habitually retained, when all remembrance of its origin was effaced.

It may be inferred that the Canaanites and the other nations of the East, were in the habit of tattooing their skins, because Moses, (Levit.xix, 28.) expressly enjoins the Israelites not to imprint any marks upon their bodies, in imitation of the heathens.

The ancient inhabitants of the British Islands, painted their skins in various grotesque figures, with the juice of woad. This custom of tattooing was in use both by the Britons and their first invaders, the Belgæ, and I believe it will be found, that the warriors of all those nations which practised tattooing, invariably threw off their garments in the hour of battle. The name of Picts, is said, though erroneously, to have been given by the Romans to the Caledonians, who possessed the East coast of Scotland, from their painting their bodies. This circumstance has made some imagine that the Picts were of British extraction, and a different race of men from the Scots. That more of the Britons who fled northward, from the oppression and tyranny of the Romans, settled in the low lands of Scotland, than among the Scots of the mountains, may be easily imagined, from the very nature of the country. It was these people who introduced painting among the Picts, From this circumstance, some antiquaries affirm, proceeded the name of the latter, to distinguish them from the Scots, who never had that art among them, and from the Britons, who discontinued the practice of tattooing after the Roman conquest.

The inhabitants of the South Sea Islands, at this day, paint upon their bodies various grotesque figures, for the purpose of striking terror into their enemies, in the day of battle.J. S.

49.From the Classical Journal.

49.From the Classical Journal.

50.This eminent naturalist and excellent man, was justly admired both at home and abroad for his virtues and knowledge in every branch of human learning, more particularly in natural history. He was the son of Sir Francis Willoughby, Knt. of Wollaton Hall in the county of Nottingham. Observing in the busy and inquisitive age in which he lived, that the history of animated nature had in a great measure been neglected, he made the study and illustration thereof his unceasing object. For the promotion of this branch of science he went abroad with Mr. Ray, for the purpose of searching out and describing the several species and productions of nature. He travelled over most parts of France, Spain, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands, in all which countries he was so diligent and successful, that not many sorts of animals described by others escaped his observation. He drew them with a pencil, and they were afterwards engraven on copper-plates, at the expense of his widow. His labours were printed in latin under the title of “Ornithologiæ libri tres, &c.London, 1676,“ folio. This work was afterwards translated into English by Mr. Ray, with an appendix, and printed at London, in 1678. Mr. Willoughby also wrote the “History of Fishes,” which was published by Mr. Ray, at London, in 1686, in folio. He likewise printed several papers in the Philosophical Transactions. Mr. Willoughby died on the third of July, 1672, leaving issue by his wife, Emma, daughter and co-heir of Sir Henry Bernard, Knt. two Sons, Francis and Thomas, and one daughter Cassandra, married to the Duke of Chandos. The second son Thomas was in 1712 created Lord Middleton, from whom is descended the present peer of that title.

50.This eminent naturalist and excellent man, was justly admired both at home and abroad for his virtues and knowledge in every branch of human learning, more particularly in natural history. He was the son of Sir Francis Willoughby, Knt. of Wollaton Hall in the county of Nottingham. Observing in the busy and inquisitive age in which he lived, that the history of animated nature had in a great measure been neglected, he made the study and illustration thereof his unceasing object. For the promotion of this branch of science he went abroad with Mr. Ray, for the purpose of searching out and describing the several species and productions of nature. He travelled over most parts of France, Spain, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands, in all which countries he was so diligent and successful, that not many sorts of animals described by others escaped his observation. He drew them with a pencil, and they were afterwards engraven on copper-plates, at the expense of his widow. His labours were printed in latin under the title of “Ornithologiæ libri tres, &c.London, 1676,“ folio. This work was afterwards translated into English by Mr. Ray, with an appendix, and printed at London, in 1678. Mr. Willoughby also wrote the “History of Fishes,” which was published by Mr. Ray, at London, in 1686, in folio. He likewise printed several papers in the Philosophical Transactions. Mr. Willoughby died on the third of July, 1672, leaving issue by his wife, Emma, daughter and co-heir of Sir Henry Bernard, Knt. two Sons, Francis and Thomas, and one daughter Cassandra, married to the Duke of Chandos. The second son Thomas was in 1712 created Lord Middleton, from whom is descended the present peer of that title.

51.He was an alderman of London, and after the Exchequer was shut retired to Holland, where he died, and was brought over to be interred in the church of Tyringham, in Buckinghamshire, where he lies embalmed. A glass is placed over his face, so that it is likely he may even be seen at this time. There is a small portrait of him at Tyringham House, in which he is represented in long hair and a flowered gown, with a table by him.

51.He was an alderman of London, and after the Exchequer was shut retired to Holland, where he died, and was brought over to be interred in the church of Tyringham, in Buckinghamshire, where he lies embalmed. A glass is placed over his face, so that it is likely he may even be seen at this time. There is a small portrait of him at Tyringham House, in which he is represented in long hair and a flowered gown, with a table by him.

52.A part of the national debt, amounting to £664,263, is as old as this iniquitous transaction of Charles the second and his ministers. This sum was all that those persons received, who had placed their property and their confidence in that monarch, for the loss of £1,328,526, and 26 years interest thereon at 6 per cent. about £2,100,000 more.

52.A part of the national debt, amounting to £664,263, is as old as this iniquitous transaction of Charles the second and his ministers. This sum was all that those persons received, who had placed their property and their confidence in that monarch, for the loss of £1,328,526, and 26 years interest thereon at 6 per cent. about £2,100,000 more.

53.Tradescant was the first English collector of curiosities in a private rank. Thoresby was the second.Gough’s Topogr.

53.Tradescant was the first English collector of curiosities in a private rank. Thoresby was the second.Gough’s Topogr.

54.The late James West,Esq.told Mr. Bull, that one of the family of Roelans, of which there are four or five prints by Hollar, lived a long while at Lambeth, in the house that afterwards belonged to Tradescant, to whom Roelans sold it.Granger’s B. II.2. 371.

54.The late James West,Esq.told Mr. Bull, that one of the family of Roelans, of which there are four or five prints by Hollar, lived a long while at Lambeth, in the house that afterwards belonged to Tradescant, to whom Roelans sold it.Granger’s B. II.2. 371.

55.In the year 1656 the younger Tradescant, published a small volume, entitled “Museum Tradescantianum, or a Collection of Rarities preserved at South Lambeth. London, 1656, small octavo.” This book is divided into two parts, the first containing a catalogue of the museum, and the second an enumeration of the plants, shrubs, and trees, growing in the garden at South Lambeth. Among the natural curiosities here preserved are “a dragon’s egg—the claw of the birdRock, which, as authors report, is able to trusse an elephant,” &c. &c.

55.In the year 1656 the younger Tradescant, published a small volume, entitled “Museum Tradescantianum, or a Collection of Rarities preserved at South Lambeth. London, 1656, small octavo.” This book is divided into two parts, the first containing a catalogue of the museum, and the second an enumeration of the plants, shrubs, and trees, growing in the garden at South Lambeth. Among the natural curiosities here preserved are “a dragon’s egg—the claw of the birdRock, which, as authors report, is able to trusse an elephant,” &c. &c.

56.These drawings are engraven in the Philosophical Trans.vol.63,p.88; and printed from the same plates, in Bibl. Topogr. Brit.vol.2. in Dr. Ducarel’s Hist. of Lambeth.

56.These drawings are engraven in the Philosophical Trans.vol.63,p.88; and printed from the same plates, in Bibl. Topogr. Brit.vol.2. in Dr. Ducarel’s Hist. of Lambeth.

57.Tradescant’s was the next botanical garden in England after Gerard’s.Gerard seems to have been the first that cultivated a botanical garden. He had a large one near his house in Holborn, London, where he raised nearly eleven hundred different trees and plants. He published his history of plants in 1597 under the patronage of Lord Burleigh. His herbal was republished in 1636 by Johnson.

57.Tradescant’s was the next botanical garden in England after Gerard’s.

Gerard seems to have been the first that cultivated a botanical garden. He had a large one near his house in Holborn, London, where he raised nearly eleven hundred different trees and plants. He published his history of plants in 1597 under the patronage of Lord Burleigh. His herbal was republished in 1636 by Johnson.

58.This was written in the year 1754.

58.This was written in the year 1754.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Back to IndexNext