Introduction to sepulchral effigiesShortcuts
In England the custom of erecting effigies over the tombs of the dead did not come into vogue until about the twelfth century. Before this time intramural interments, usually restricted to high-ranking clergy near the High Altar, were covered by a plain slab without any inscription – not even the name of the deceased. It is then of no surprise that the earliest effigies we come across are either of the priest who was responsible for the rebuilding of the church, usually found under an arch set into the north wall of the chancel (Cossington - 1320) or of the wealthy laity who were buried near the altar in the chantry chapel that they founded (Maud Bassett, Ashby Folville, 1222). An important point worth remembering about all effigies is that, as a result of church fabric restoration work and rebuilding, they may not now be in their original position or even in the same church in which they were first erected. Examples include the Roos monuments in Bottesford that were once in Belvoir Priory. In 1700 Sir Henry Chauncey, in his history of Hertfordshire, stated that sepulchral monuments served four ends:
To this we can add the historical and artistic importance of the monuments, in that they illustrate the contemporary dress and fashions. However, at the same time we must keep in mind that the value of effigies as authentic representations of armour and costume depend both on the artist's knowledge and the material and tools used. The monuments are works of art in themselves; they deserve inspection and preservation for this reason alone, if for nothing else.
InscriptionsWhen inscriptions did appear, usually carved in relief round the chamfer of the tomb-chest, they were either in Latin (Hugo Turville, Thurlaston, 1340) or Norman French (John Digby, Tilton, 1269 and Agnes Turville, Thurlaston, 1349). The two counties' earliest extant English inscription is on the monument to Thomas Manners in Bottesford, which was erected in 1544. Although brasses are outside the remit of this web site, it is important to remember the brass in Wanlip church, which bears an English inscription and the date 1393. Before names were inscribed on monuments the deceased arms were the principal means of identifying the subject of a tomb. These were either painted onto the effigy's shield (John Hamelin, Wymondham, 1320); painted onto the tabard or surcoat (Roger Bellar, Kirby Bellars, 1326); painted onto the sides of the tomb-chest (Thomas Farnham, Stoughton, 1562) or placed over the tomb-chest (George Chambre, Theddingworth, 1635).
The Tomb-ChestThe tomb-chest, which followed the architectural fashions of the day, was introduced in the early 13th century. Standing some two to four feet high it was either placed against the wall or stood free in the centre of a chapel. These chapels are now normally parts of aisles and even if the altar has long since vanished its erstwhile presence can be ascertained from the redundant piscina that has usually survived the centuries and Victorian 'restoration'. Tombs of the second half of the 13th century have plain pediment-shaped canopies over the head of the recumbent effigy. The earliest of these contain a pointed trefoil-arched recess, while towards the end of the century these canopies become elaborately decorated with crockets, finials or gables (Sibson). A common feature of the mid-14th century is the addition of patterns of roses and other flowers in the spandrels (Castle Donington, 1330.) At first the sides of the tomb were decorated with tabernacled Gothic housings, ornamented with shields bearing the deceased arms, however, by the end of the 13th century niches were added in which weepers were placed. Introduced from France, initially these weepers, which represented angels or ecclesiastics, were arranged under a continuous arcade, later, however they were given their own niches. (William de Roos, Bottesford, 1414). After the Reformation, mainly due to the influence of Flemish refugee carvers, it became usual for upright representations of the children of the deceased to be used as weepers (Francis Hastings, Ashby de la Zouch, 1561). It was also in this period that shrouded figures and skeletons begin to appear - a reminder of physical death as opposed to the hitherto effigies that depicted the deceased in the prime of life (George Shirley, Breedon on the Hill, 1598). Tomb-chest decoration followed that of church architecture, and it is in this period that the sides of the chest were often decorated with formal panelling, a feature that resembled the tracery of the four- or six-light perpendicular windows, that were then in vogue for church building. (William Fielding, Lutterworth, early 15th century). From about the 1550s the sides of the chest begin to have shields encircled with wreaths or scrolls and, instead of panelled cusped quatrefoils, the compartments begin to be divided by spiral balusters (Andrew Noel, Old Dalby, 1562). Although in the pre-Reformation period some altar tombs were canopied, resembling the covered altars of the Roman faith, very few of this type were erected after the death of Mary in 1558. Portraiture and AttitudeDuring the 12th and 13th centuries we come across specimens of partial effigies, a phenomenon that gives the impression of the face and feet of the deceased showing through apertures in the coffin lid (Great Casterton). Very flat and formal the first full effigies were made out of black Tornai marble carved solidly out of the ledger stone. However, by the end of the 12th century home produced Purbeck Marble began to take over as the preferred medium (Robert de Roos, Bottesford, 1236). A bolder and more elaborate style was soon acquired and the effigy became more of a distinct statue, wrought out of a separate block of marble or stone, and then affixed to its destined tomb. During the early Middle Ages there was very little attempt made at portraiture - types rather than individual characteristics were the main aim - a priest was a priest, and a knight a knight. That this was so can be seen in Sir Walter Mauny's will of 1371, wherein he stipulates that an image of a knight be placed over his tomb …je devise que une tombe dalabastre soit fait ove un chivaler de armes… Contracts, such as that for the tomb of John Shirley at Breedon, ordered that pictures or portraitures 'representing' the deceased be erected. Many workshops kept a supply of stock patterns, which they delivered as and when required. Another point to keep in mind is that the effigies were not always erected at the time of death. Sometimes a number of years elapsed before the order for the monument was placed, and with no photographs and very few portraits the medieval carver had no way of knowing how the subject looked. An example being the previously-mentioned monument to John Shirley at Breedon; he died in 1570, but the monument was not erected until 1585. Towards the end of the Middle Ages some tombs were prepared during the lifetime of the subject, but these were the exceptions rather than the rule. One local example is the monument to Francis, 6th Earl of Rutland, at Bottesford. In the early medieval period there was very little attempt at giving the figure a recumbent attitude; the effigy was built straight-legged in a standing attitude and just laid onto the tomb. Most of these effigies have animals at their feet, suggesting the corbel upon which the upright figures in the church niches stood, while the only note of recumbency was the cushion placed beneath the head (Rosia de Verdon, Belton, 1248). From about 1240 some effigies were made with crossed legs. A common belief is that this signifies participation in one or the other of the crusades, indeed many church guides, written by well-meaning parishioners, often refer to 'The Crusader'. In many cases, however, it can be proved that the subject never went anywhere near the Holy Land. Indeed, it is not unknown for civilians, male and female, to be depicted in the cross-legged attitude (Thurlaston). The real reason, I believe, for the cross-legged effigy is that it gives an idea of a recumbent posture while at the same time strengthening the figure at its weakest point. This fashion, which seems to be a uniquely English and Irish trait, not found in any other country, survived into the 14th century and seems to have died out about 1350. Reclining effigies began to appear in Rome around 1500 and the fashion gradually spread across Europe to England. The main advantage of the reclining figure over the recumbent one is that when the effigy is above eye level it cannot be seen, whereas the reclining one can. If both effigies are reclining it is sometimes the case that one has closed and the other open eyes to show who was alive when the effigies were carved. By the 16th century mural, rather than free standing, monuments become the fashion. Either recessed into, or reared against, the wall they often give the appearance of the contemporary fire-place with its heavy and cumbrous chimney. Some of the earlier ones have recumbent effigies but from the 17th century the figures are usually placed kneeling at a lectern upon which an open book lies. In the case of husband and wife the lectern is usually double and placed between the two figures (George Purefoy, Fenny Drayton, 1631). After the civil wars standing classical monuments began supplanting the Gothic styles that had dominated the past (George Manners, Bottesford, 1686). One reason for this was the excavations at Herculaneum, which created an immense amount of interest all over Europe and incited an outbreak of Neo-Hellenism. An example of this trend in Leicestershire is the classical urn, modelled on the minor Greek art of vase painting, which constitutes the memorial to Theophilus Hastings, who died in 1746, at Ashby de la Zouch. Not everyone, however, liked the change in fashion. William Kelke, writing in 1850, felt moved to comment:
People were not always as concerned about historical artefacts as we are today. At the time of the Reformation many memorials were destroyed due to the iconoclastic attitudes of those who wished to see churches 'cleansed' of all signs of 'popery'.
The Reformation also saw the disappearance of many monuments in monastic churches that were put up for sale along with the other ecclesiastical property. In one of the books of surveys made by the Augmentation Office we read that at the sale of the contents of Owston church a 'tombe of marble' and a 'tombe of
alabaster in the wall' were sold to one Thomas Harper for £2 and £1 respectively. At Garendon 'a monument of alabaster' was sold for ten shillings. (John Nichols History and Antiquities of the County of Leicester Vol. I, Part I, pp cxxxviii-iv) These monuments would probably have been brought by builders, who broke them up for use as building material.
As well as a low demand for effigies (only two were erected in Leicestershire and Rutland between 1530 and 1560 – Everard Digby at Stoke Dry and Thomas Manners at Bottesford) such was the wanton destruction of the
years following the Reformation that, in 1561, Queen Elizabeth had to issue a proclamation which spoke out against
'… sundrie people partly ignorant, partly malicious or covetous [that have] of late yeares spoiled and broken certaine ancient monuments…'
The Act went on to 'forbeare the breaking or defacing of any parts of any Monument or Tombe or Grave, or other inscription and meaning of any person deceased…'
This did not prevent the ignorant from damaging effigies. Indeed, David Fentley in his Clacius Mystica (published in 1636) noted that whereas a fortune was being spent on monuments, the church fabric was suffering for want of money, indeed he went on to say, with remarkable foresight, that were this not so, 'the reproach of neglecting churches would have been removed from our age.'
Another observer, John Aubrey, writing just after the civil wars, noted that the sexton at the abbey church of Dore had broken off the arm of a cross-legged effigy which he used as a whetstone to sharpen his scythe. It is unlikely that this was an isolated incident and that many monuments around the country must have suffered a similar fate.
Iconoclastic attitudes lasted into the eighteenth century when, in 1718, John Neeve observed that when a church was pulled down and rebuilt no-one thought of preserving the effigies, instead of which 'the marble is thrown in heaps in a corner'.
Eighty years later, things still had not improved, for it was still being complained that monuments were being left to decay. John Nichols, the great Leicestershire historian of the late 18th / early 19th centuries, himself felt moved to complain of the 'shame, want of taste and gratitude to let the tombs of ancestors decay', a problem, he hastened to add, that was not just confined to Leicestershire, but was a national disgrace. One would like to think that we live in more enlightened times and that our historical monuments are now safe for the generations yet to come.
Although many local monuments have vanished without trace, we do know about some of the more important ones – such as that to the memory of Richard III, erected by order of Henry VI, in the Church of the Grey Friars, Leicester. Others we can only guess at by the empty tomb recesses found in so many of our parish churches.
The first comprehensive listing of church monuments in Leicestershire is that made by John Nichols at the end of the eighteenth century. However, almost 200 years earlier, in 1622, William Burton, in his A Description of Leicestershire, mentions a, now lost, cross-legged effigy of Roger de Amary at Frowlesworth.
It must be noted, however, that some of the sketches and descriptions in Nichols' History and Antiquities of the County of Leicester (1792) and Blore's History and Antiquities of the County of Rutland (1811) are not always as accurate as they could be.
We do not know how much Blore inspected for himself, but we do know that Nichols compiled his massive work from letters and sketches sent him by various correspondents. Without taking away any of the importance of Nichols' work, it must be remembered that it is at best a secondary, if not tertiary, source of information and as such is to be treated as a rough, albeit informative, guide only.
This website does not included incised slabs or brasses. In the case of inscribed slabs it would be impossible to improve on F. A. Greenhill's The Incised Slabs of Leicestershire and Rutland. Published by the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society in 1958, this acclaimed work is now sadly out of print.
Brasses are a subject in themselves and the reader is referred to Dora Valentine's 'Church Brasses of Leicestershire' (Vaughan Paper No. 20. University of Leicester 1975).
Sepulchral Effigies of Leicestershire and Rutland
This website does not gather or store any visitor information.
|