Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

ncluding a valuable casket formerly belonging to the unortunate Anne Boleyn, several ancient stone cannon-balls, and a very curious key.

Concerning the history of this interesting structure, we learn from Hasted, and other Kentish historians, that Leeds was part of the possessions given by William the Conqueror to Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, by whom it was subsequently confiscated to the crown. The family of the Crevequers, or Crevecœur, soon afterwards had a grant of Leeds from the Conqueror; and by one Robert of that name, the castle appears to have been erected. In conjunction with Adam, his son, he founded a priory dedicated to St. Mary and St. Nicholas, at a short distance west of the castle. He had previously fitted up a chapel in the fortress, and in it had

France, he settled them, with other premises, as part of her dower. She survived the king, her husband, who died in 1307; and in the fifth year of the next reign, namely, that of Edward II., by the recommendation of the crown, appointed Bartholomew de Badlesmere, a nobleman of considerable power and eminence, and steward of the king's household, as governor of this castle. Upon her demise, five years later, the estates again reverted to the crown, when the manor of Leeds, together with the advowson of the priory, were granted to Lord Badlesmere, in fee, in exchange for the manor of Adderley, in Shropshire. The ambition of this nobleman, combined with his immense wealth-for he was possessed of great estates, more especially in Kent, from which circumstance he was invariably styled the "rich Lord

[graphic][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

placed three priests, whom he removed thither upon his founding the priory. Leeds continued in the possession of the Crevequers until the fifty-second year or the reign of Henry III., when the manor was exchanged with Roger de Leyburne for the manors of Trottesclyve and Flete. At his death, Roger left a son and heir, William de Leyburne, who, in the reign of Edward I., had possession granted him of the manor of Leeds; as well as of the rest of the inheritance of which his step-mother, Eleanor, Countess of Winchester, was not endowed. However, it is said that, finding the king regarded the strength of this fortress with great jealousy, William de Leyburne reinstated the Crown in the possession of both the manor and castle; and on the king's marriage with Margaret, sister of Philip, King of

Badlesmere of Leeds "led him to forget his allegiance, and he joined with the Earl of Lancaster and the discontented barons who had taken up arms against the king's great favourite, Piers de Gaveston, Earl of Cornwall. Upon this, the king resolved, if possible, to gain possession of this strong fortress, and in 1321 a somewhat curious stratagem is said to have been adopted to effect that purpose, for it is recorded how, under the pretence of the queen's performing a pilgrimage to Canterbury, she set forward, accompanied by a large train of attendants, and, with the secret intention of surprising the castle, sent her marshal, with others of her suite, to order lodgings for herself and her servants. Lady Badlesmere, her son, and four daughters, were at that time in the fortress under the care of Sir Thomas Colepeper, the

castellan, who was directed to refuse the queen's servants land during the civil wars. The castle remained in the admittance, which, upon the arrival of the queen in person, Fairfax family until the death of Robert, last Lord Fairfax, he still peremptorily persisted in, without having received in 1793, when it devolved on his nephew, the Rev. Denny express orders to that effect. Force was thereupon resorted Martin, D.D., who, before his uncle's death, had taken the to, and in the skirmish which ensued several of the queen's name and arms of Fairfax. On the death of Dr. Martin-Fairattendants were slain, and, being thus repulsed, she re- fax the estate passed to his brother, General Philip Martin, linquished her design, and was compelled to seek a lodging| R.A. _It subsequently passed by bequest to Fiennes Wyke. elsewhere.* To resent the indignity thus offered to the ham, Esq., grandfather of the present owner, who, in 1821, queen, a force was despatched, under the Earls of Pembroke assumed, by royal licence, the additional surname of Martin. and Richmond, to take the castle by storm; when those He died in 1840, and was succeeded by his eldest son within, finding no hopes of relief, were soon compelled to Charles, some time M.P. for West Kent and for Newsurrender. A scene of great confusion quickly followed: port, in the Isle of Wight, and who died in 1870, Lady Badlesmere, with her children, were sent as prisoners leaving by his first wife, Lady Jemima Isabella, daughter of to the Tower of London; Sir Thomas Colepeper, the castel- the fifth and last Earl of Cornwallis, a son and heir, Philip, lan, was hanged on the chain of the drawbridge, and the king M.P. for Rochester, who has inherited the estate of Leeds took possession of the castle and all the treasures it con- Castle, and other property belonging to this ancient family. tained. Lord Badlesmere was subsequently taken prisoner Within the last fifty years, in fact, since the accession of in Yorkshire, and being sent to Canterbury, was there Mr. Fiennes Wykeham-Martin, great care has been taken executed, and his head set on a pole on Burgate in that to preserve, as far as possible, all that remains of the original city. fabric from the unavoidable ravages of time; and thus to hand down to posterity one of the most perfect examples of the military architecture of our ancestors to be met with in this kingdom.

Leeds Castle was now suffered to fall into a most ruinous condition, continuing, meantime, in the possession of the Crown till 1359, when Edward III. constituted that eminent architect, William de Wykeham (afterwards Bishop of Winchester), its chief warden and surveyor, and invested him with power to appoint workmen, provide materials, and order everything requisite for building and reparations.

W. D.

ANCIENT NEEDLEWORK AT THE SOUTH
KENSINGTON MUSEUM.

(Continued from page 47.)

Under his direction the castle is said to have been restored in a very skilful manner. Richard II. was induced to visit the place on several occasions, more particularly in his nineteenth year, at which period many of his public documents THE most ancient specimens of embroidery in this extensive were dated "from his castle of Leeds." The building was collection are the two small pieces contained in frame 51, also the residence of Henry IV. during the month of April, and dating from the ninth century. One of these has in the second year of his reign (1406), when he retired thither indeed a pedigree of sanctity, as it is said to be a portion of on account of the plague which was then raging in London. the cushion-cover upon which was laid the finger of St. Towards the close of the fourteenth century, Archbishop Arundel procured a grant of Leeds Castle; he frequently resided there, and on his death, in 1413, it again reverted to the crown. From this date many of the principal gentry of Kent have been at different periods entrusted with its custody.

In the seventh year of Henry V., Joan of Navarre, the second queen of his predecessor, was committed as a prisoner to Leeds Castle for having conspired against the life of the king, but was afterwards delivered into the custody of Sir John Pelham, and was by him conveyed to Pevensey Castle, in Sussex. In 1440, Archbishop Chichele presided at Leeds Castle over the process instituted against Eleanor, Duchess of Gloucester, for alleged sorcery and witchcraft. During the reign of Henry VIII. a great portion of the fortress was rebuilt at the king's expense, by Sir Henry Guldeford, who at that time held the office of constable of Leeds Castle and ranger of the park. The manor and castle remained in the possession of the Crown till the reign of Edward VI., when they were granted to Sir Anthony St. Leger, lord deputy of Ireland, to hold in capite by knight's service. The castle was subsequently alienated to Sir Richard Smyth, who rebuilt the southern portion of the edifice, and died possessed of it in 1628, and on the death of his son and successor in 1632, it passed by sale into the hands of Sir Thomas Colepeper, of Hollingbourne. During the exile of Charles II., Leeds Castle seems to have been in the possession of the usurping powers, and to have been used by them for as sembling the committee men and sequestrators, and also as a prison for the ejected ministers. From the Colepepers the estate passed, by marriage, to Thomas, fifth Lord Fairfax, a relative of the famous general of that name so noted in Eng

During the alterations which were made at the castle in 1822, the skeletons of several of the soldiers slain in this conflict were dug up; one of them, which had its skull smashed in, must have been of colossal proportions, for it measured no less than six feet two inches, not merely without its shoes, but without its feet.

Luke, presented by Charlemagne to Archbishop Magnus of Sens. It is a small square of red silk, embroidered with heraldic lions in gold. The other is also an embroidery of gold on red silk, and represents St. Martin sharing his cloak with a beggar. These examples are marked as probably French, and are lent by Mons. Henry Esminger. The astonishing age of these relics of antiquity is indeed a fit subject for wonderment, and it could only be the purity of the gold used in their fabrication, which has enabled it to stand the test of a thousand years and retain much of its brilliancy even in the present day. The gold used anciently in instances of this kind was the genuine metal beaten out into thin strips, which were then worked into the material with which the precious substance was to be combined. The work next most remarkable in point of antiquity is a “Band of Linen," embroidered in silk by the Countess Ghilsa, wife of Guifred, Comte de Cerdagne. It is, according to Mons. Jubinal's description, French, and dates from the 11th century. But there is nothing in its style in the least approaching French art; and not only the arabesque inscriptions, but the remainder of the design denotes equally a Moorish or Oriental origin. Either the Countess had borrowed her pattern from an Arab or Moorish source, or she was possibly herself of such extraction. It is so rich and beautiful in its gem-like kaleidoscope effect, so different from, and superior to the European handicraft of the kind, that the Prophet must enlist the gratitude of all lovers of true art in design for having, by his religious ordinances, instituted regulations which have had so admirable an effect upon the artistic productions of his followers. It was with a view to prevent the possibility of a recurrence to idolatry that the founder of Islâm forbade the representation of animated beings. Thus, in most Oriental ornamenta. tions, we are spared the hideous attempts at the portraiture of living things by the art of the needle. In no Turkish of Moorish divan is there any danger of walking into the open jaws of a lion or tiger; no fear of an uneasy seat upon garlands of fruit or flowers. Natural objects are submitted to

scientific rules of decoration, and the results are beauty, moderation, and adaption to the uses intended; while portraiture, whether of animated or still life, is left to the professed picture-maker or sculptor. This special example, we are told, belonged to the Abbaye de St. Martin de Canigon, and a fragment of an altar-cloth, the other part, has been offered to the Musée de Cluny by Mons. Achille Jubinal, the lender of that exhibited in the present instance. There is no example of the embroidery of the twelfth century, and the only one given of the thirteenth is ecclesiastical, and in a state of great dilapidation. It consists of a velvet chasuble with orphreys, nine panels complete, and apparently represents Biblical scenes. The Marquis of Bute, Baron Davillier, Mons. Spitzer, the Fishmongers' Company, and Mr. Frederick Leighton, R.A., appear to be the only contributors of needlework of the fourteenth century. The example belonging to Lord Bute is an orphrey recently mounted on a church vestment of white satin and bearing the "arms of John Grandison, who died Bishop of Exeter, in 1369." The embroidery, which is specified as English, has been partially restored, and is enclosed in a series of medallions, containing portraits of holy The faces of these personages worked in silk and gold. figures are executed in a similar manner to the other examples of the fourteenth century, but they display considerably less skill. Part of an ecclesiastical vestment, lent by Baron Davillier, represents eight saints, and is particularized as a rare specimen. It is of German nationality, as indeed, from its strongly marked Teutonic style, would be at once inferred. Apparently, the work is executed upon coarse linen or canvas, covered over with crimson silk, or possibly upon the silk itself; but being in a very ruinous state, patches of the ground or lining are everywhere visible through the embroidery. Monsieur Spitzer's rich and elaborate cover for a cloister desk, in embroidery on red velvet, displays on one side a large "mystical bird with outspread wings, the Trinity worked in silk on its chest, and the inscription In principio erat verbum, &c," on scrolls at each side. A border of gold and silk, ornamented with small convex metal studs in imitation of pearls, encloses the work and the central portion of crimson velvet and gold filagree. On the other side is the representation of an apostle, worked in gold and coloured silks, and holding a scroll upon which the same inscription is traced, while a vision of the Virgin and Child appears in part of the picture. The faces are executed in the finest silk embroidery, the original tracing of the lineaments being in some instances apparent beneath the subsequently-added needlework. This embroidery is stated to be French, and was a present from Charles V. to the Monastery of Yuste, in which he passed the latter days of his life.

The interesting antique pall belonging to the Fishmongers' Company, and illustrating English work of the fourteenth century, consists of embroidery in silk and gold on coarse linen. We learn that it was used at the funeral of Sir William Walworth, in the time of Richard II., 1381. The head and foot of the covering are ornamented with a design representing St. Peter on a throne; an angel with the traditional, fair, gold-coloured hair assigned to feminine saints, and with wings of peacock's plumage, kneels at each side. The faces of these groups possess considerable expression and are treated in the same manner as the last example, the use of gold being very profuse. The sides of the pall are decorated with scriptural subjects alternating with the arms of the Fishmongers' Company.

either "net-work" or what ladies understand under the title of needlework, except such as was patiently constructed by the good old-fashioned knitting-needles of our grandmothers, a specimen of which sort of industry the jacket undoubtedly is, with the gold knitted into the fabric in the ordinary fashion when silk or thread of two or more different colours is employed. A gallant Indian officer, whom we once knew, and boasting the manly stature of six feet with breadth to correspond, would have detected the inaccuracy of description with a glance as sharp as that of even a feminine critic, for having been taught as a child to knit, by his mother, a lady of title, but of exceptionally domestic habits, when a storm, on one of his voyages to the Peninsula, carried away his woollen vest, he immediately set to work and knitted a new one, to the immense entertainment and edification of his brother officers, who expected nothing less than such an accomplishment from the military Adonis of their regiment. The jaunty little jacket from which we have digressed, is certainly picturesque and artistic, but it is not possessed of any specially distinguishing characteristics of the fourteenth century, and might have been produced in the Germany of to-day, or any day since the quaint art was invented. Otherwise is it with the works involving more deliberate consideration and preparation, and where the real embroidery needle has essayed to imitate the results of the painter's brush, or draughtsman's pencil. In such cases, the style indicative of each age may be distinctly traced.

Queries.

SIR WILLIAM HAWKSWORTH.-The following singular story was quoted by Dr. Kenealy, towards the close of his address for the Tichborne defence :

"There is a singular thing related by Lord Chief Justice Hale in the records of the Crown. He relates the case of Sir William Hawksworth, who being weary of his life, wanted to get rid of it by another hand. He blamed his park-keeper for losing his deer, and told him to shoot the man who refused to stand and speak. Sir William came in the park at night, and refusing to stand or speak, was shot and killed. That is about as astonishing a thing as ever (Vide Daily happened in the course of human life." Telegraph, August 22.)

In Foss's "Judges of England" (Vol. iv. 325) I find the following related of Chief Justice Sir William Hankford (the successor of Sir William Gascoigne) who died December 20. 1422:

"A very improbable account of his death is given by his biographer. He is stated to have become weary of his life, and, with an intention of getting out of it, to have given strict orders to his keeper to shoot any person found at night in his park who would not stand when challenged; and then to have thrown himself in his keeper's way, and to have been shot dead in pursuance of his own commands. The cause of this suicidal conduct is represented to have been his direful apprehensions of dangerous approaching evils;' which could only have arisen from a diseased imagination, as there was nothing at that time in the political horizon to portend the disasters of thirty years' distance. Holinshed introduces this event as happening in 1470, very nearly fifty years after the death of the Chief Justice. The story, however, was long believed in the neighbourhood of his seat at Annery, in Monkleigh, and an old oak bearing his name was shown in the park, where it was said he had fallen.”

The remaining example of the industry of the fourteenth century is in a very different style of needlework from that of the grand and stately ecclesiastical robes. It is a girl's jacket, such as some Esmeralda or Preciosa might be I assume "Sir William Hawksworth" to be identical imagined to have worn, and is specified as of "green silk with "Sir William Hankford." If not, who was the former? network, golden embroideries worked into it in arabesques." Is this "astounding " and improbable story related of any. This designation, however, upon nearer examination, ap-one else besides the Chief Justice? pears to be a misnomer, for the work is not by any means

W. D. PINK,

OLIVER CROMWELL.-I have often seen engravings representing "Cromwell at Marston Moor," in which Oliver is depicted as making a sword cut at a royalist cuirassier, who is levelling a pistol at Cromwell's head. Is there any account of this incident, or does it only originate in the imagination of the artist. There is also a painting, which has been engraved, called the "Battle of Worcester." It represents an old, bareheaded, mounted cavalier, making a sword-thrust at a Roundhead cornet, who carries, in his right hand, a Commonwealth standard (charged with the St. George's cross and harp), and, with his left hand, is covering the cavalier with a pistol. Is this scene historical or imaginary

D. TROWBRIDGE.

and general aspect of this remarkable man to the Spencer
and the medallic portraits, and the various engraved render-
ings of these ?
H. ECROYD SMITH.

ADMIRAL BLAKE.-Is there any authentic portrait of the gallant Admiral Blake? The one at Greenwich represents him with lightish brown hair, but I have doubts as to its authenticity, as it differs entirely from the one engraved in Hepworth Dixon's memoir of the naval hero. In the latter he has a full plump face, and, apparently, black, or, at least, ?very dark hair. The latter portrait resembles one I saw for sale some years ago, asserted to be that of the renowned "Admiral and General at Sea." It was a half-length, the figure being attired in a suit of black armour, with gilt rivets. The face was close shaven, and very plump, or rather, I may say, fat, with a double chin, and pleasant, jovial expression. The mouth was feminine in its smallness, and its short pouting upper lip. The eyes were large and black, and the long hair dark as a raven's wing; but the singularity of the portrait lay in the complexion, which was of a creamy whiteness, without the slightest flush on the jolly cheeks. As it is always interesting to know how a departed hero looked, when walking the earth, I should be glad to know whether there is any undoubted portrait of the Admiral extant, and if so, whether it has the hair and eyes and death-pale face of the one I have described ?

KEELINGE FAMILY.-I wish to obtain information relative to this family, which was formerly seated at Sedgley Park, co. Stafford. Lord Chief Justice Keelinge was a member. Who is the male representative, and is there a pedigree anywhere extant? In the seventeenth century a certain Lady Foster married into this family, I believe; is anything known of her ladyship's family? The arms of Keelinge are-Gules, between two lions rampant or, a bend engrailed of the second, charged with three scaling ladders of the field.

F.

COLONEL JOHN LILBURNE.-Doubting whether any full, to say nothing of true and particular, account of the extant portraits of "Free-born John" has ever been supplied to the public, I append a list kindly furnished by a friend as a nucleus, conceiving that, ere the subject drops, a suitable opportunity occurs for enquiry.

1. Portrait. 8vo, Holler.

2. Whole length with names of jury. 4to.

3. From Earl Spencer's drawing, by Bullfinch; engraved by Cooper.

4. Æt. 23, 1641; altered when in prison. 8vo, G. Glover. 5. A small oval with account of his sufferings. Holler. 6. Standing at the Bar; prefixed to his "Trial," 1649. 4to.

[blocks in formation]

Of the above only numbers 4, 5, and 6 appear in Bromley's catalogue. I possess a copper plate, originally, probably, in 8vo, which, in common with numbers 3 and 7, may have been engraved from the Spencer portrait, although the face, in my print, is at least one-fourth longer in proportion to the size, whilst the features are infinitely older than the smooth-faced portrait as produced by Cooper; the dress and cut of the hair is, however, identical. The only signature to my print is "Benoist Sculp," and it certainly ought to have been known to Bromley, who also is in default through making no mention of the various medals and medallets struck under the auspices of Simon, and, perhaps, other artists. Two, at least, of Simon's were engraved by Vertue in his illustrations of this clever die-sinker's productions, viz.: -Circular Medal-ob. Bust of Lilburne, to left circumscription in three lines." JOHN LILBORNE SAVED BY THE POWER OF THE LORD AND THE INTEGRITY OF HIS IVRY WHO ARE IVDGES OF LAW AS WELL AS FACT, OCT. 26, 1649." Rev. an expanded rose, circumscribed with a list of the jurors, viz. :-"MYLES PETTY; STE. ILES; ALR. SMITH; ION. KING; MIC. MVRIN; THO. DAINTY; EDM. KEYSAR; EDW. PARKINS; RAL. PACKMAN; WM. COMINS ; SY. WHEELDON; HEN. TOWLEY; OCT. 26, 1649." The second is a small oval medallet, looped on top for suspension to the person-ob. Bust of Lilburne to the left, "IOHN LILBORN." Rev. shield of the family arms upon an oval shaded ground, "OCT. 26, 1649." Is any original oil painting, or other medal or drawing known than those specified? In other words, are we dependent or our knowledge of the features.

C. HUME.

THE KIMBERS OF GLOUCESTERSHIRE.-Is anything known of a Gloucestershire family named Kimber? Burke, in his "General Armoury," gives the arms of Kimber as,Argent, three Cornish choughs, sable, beaked and legged gules; on a chief of the second, as many mullets of the flectas." Are these the arms of the Kimbers of Gloucesterfirst. Crest, a bull's head affronté. Motto, "Franzas non shire, and, if not, to what branch of the family do they belong? FRASER.

ARMORIAL.-I have a carved oak panel, date about 1650, consisting of a coat of arms, surrounded by a border of

flowers, and scrolls cut in a very bold style (I am told it

came from the old church at Tooting, Surrey, which was
pulled down some few years since). On the shield are cut
the following arms :-A chevron, between what appears to
be three wolves' heads erased, crowned, impaling a talbot
(or hound) in fess, between three fleurs-de-lis. Could any of
your correspondents inform me by whom these arms were
borne ?
R. G. RICE.

ANCIENT JEWEL.-Is the jewel alluded to in the following extract, still in existence, and if so in whose possession does it remain ?

"An ancient medal, or coin, ornamented with jewe s was purchased, a few years since, of one of the decendants of Penderell, to whom it was presented by Charles II., as a valuable token of his gratitude for certain protection afforded by him to that prince, when endeavouring to effect his escape in disguise from England, in the year 1648. It consists of a gold coin of Ferdinand II., dated 1638, surrounded by a row of sixteen brilliants, enchased in silver, enriched with blue enamel, and bearing the motto, Usque ad aris fidelis.' The reverse is also enamelled, and the jewel is intended to be worn as an ornament to the person."

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

Replies.

H. WRIGHT.

CROMWELL'S GRAVE (Vol. iv. 32, 82).-I cannot agree with your correspondents in believing that there would be any probability of discovering the Protector Oliver's burialplace on the Field of Naseby. There are many idle stories about his interment, but the following passage in Cunningham's "Handbook of London" (2nd edit., pp. 516-7) describes accurately, as I believe, the real facts of the case :Oliver Cromwell, Ireton, and Bradshaw, were hung, on the "On the three wooden stilts of Tyburn, the bodies of first anniversary (Jan. 30th, 1660-1) of the execution of Charles I. after the Restoration. Their bodies were dragged from their graves in Henry VII.'s Chapel, in Westminster Abbey, and removed at night to the Red Lion Inn, in sledges to Tyburn, and there, in their shrouds and cereHolborn, from whence they were carried next morning in cloths, suspended till sunset, at the several angles of the bodies buried beneath the gallows, and their heads set upon gallows. They were then taken down and beheaded, their poles on the top of Westminster Hall."

That it was the real body of Cromwell that was thus treated can admit of no reasonable doubt. It was carefully embalmed, and could not be mistaken by the persons who carried out the barbarous order of the House of Lords. This of course disposes of the argument that he was not originally buried in Westminster Abbey, even if we do not believe the mass of historical evidence proving his original See an article entitled "Observations interment there.

scaffold, was found nestled up under her royal robes, between the bloody head and trunk of his dead mistress; and (saith an account from an eye-witness, printed at Antwerp, MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS (Vol. iii. 93).-Your corres-1588), when the blood began to flow, he licked the hideous pondent's query is not quite accurately stated. This poor wounds of her who had caressed him in life. Afterwards, Queen, who deeply earned the title of "unfortunate," was, he would never be induced to taste meat or drink, but died it is true, clumsily struck by the executioner's axe, but I am for grief." No such love, and no such friend, was near the not aware that any historian, or contemporary account of deathbed of Elizabeth, when her time came. the execution, states that Mary "afterwards covered her head with a veil, &c." The most trustworthy account of the incidents of her heroic death will be found in Jebb's history of her life; A French account of her martyrdom; and especially in Mignet's late History of Mary Queen of Scots," 1863. The Queen, who received, when ill in bed in the afternoon, the news that she was to be executed next morning at 8 o'clock, dressed herself in her widow's garb, putting on the handsomest she had (but which, from Elizabeth's mean vindictiveness, was poor at best). It was a gown of dark crimson velvet, with black satin corsage, from which chaplets and scapularies were suspended; over which was a cloak of black figured satin, a long train, lined with sable, a standing up collar, and hanging sleeves. A white veil was thrown over her, reaching from her head to her feet. She wore besides a skirt of taffety, drawers of white fustian, stockings of blue silk, garters of silk, and morocco pumps. She took with her a handkerchief, with a fringe of gold, as a bandage for her eyes on the scaffold. After being compelled to listen to a long harangue by the English parson, wherein he insulted her and her faith, at length she got to the scaffold. Here the executioners offered to assist her to undress, but she declined their service, saying she never had such “valets de chambre," and received assistance from her weeping maids. She put off cloak, veil, &c., retaining only a petticoat of red taffety, flowered with velvet. Her eyes being bandaged, and her neck laid on the block, one of the executioners holding her straightly with one of his hands, the chief executioner himself was moved, and aimed with an unsteady hand. The axe, instead of falling on the neck, struck the back of the head, and wounded her; yet her courage was such that she made no complaint, nor heaved even a sigh. At the next blow the head was cut off from the body, "except a little gristle left behind," and the tragedy was over. A black cloth was thrown over her remains. The two Earls (Kent and Shrewsbury-executioners-in-chief under the executioner-general, Queen Elizabeth) did not leave to the executioners, according to custom, the golden cross around her neck, the chaplets which hung from her girdle, nor the clothes she wore at her death, lest these dear and venerated spoils would be purchased from him by her loving servants, and be treasured up as relics. They therefore burned them. They also took great pains to prevent anything being preserved that had been stained with poor Mary's blood, all traces of which they caused to be immediately removed. The body was embalmed, very carelessly, and with very little respect; was wrapped in wax-cloth, and enclosed in a leaden-coffin, and put aside until the wishes of Mary's great enemy were known. The English, perceiving that the Queen's poor servants went to A CHILD'S CAUL (Vol. iv. 77).—The "caul" is regarded the room where the body of their friend and mistress was with great superstition, even in these days of enlightenment, lying, and looked through the keyhole (for the room was amongst mariners and sea-faring men in general. Many kept carefully locked), caused the keyhole to be stopped up, take these membranes with them believing they act as charms to prevent them this small sad consolation. When the against foul weather, while others believe they serve as talisnews of Mary's murder reached London all the bells in the mans against shipwreck. Sometimes a very strange intercity were set a-ringing, and bonfires lighted in every street,pretation is attached to them. A seaman obtains a child's so delighted and sycophantish were the people with an act caul shortly after the child is born. This he guards with which has stained with blood the name of Elizabeth for all great watchfulness, under the idea that as long as the caultime. As for "the crocodile of iniquity (Elizabeth), to born child lives he will be secure from misfortune. The paliate her dissimulation the more, she wept most bitterly, charm of these cauls many people are of opinion dies with put on mourning, and laid the whole blame on Davison." the persons with whom they are born. I have heard it -Freebairn's "Life of Mary," Edinburgh, 1725. stated that as long as the child enjoys good health the caul experiences the same, and is dry, flexible, and healthy; but on the caul-born person suffering from any sickness or declining in health, the membrane also undergoes a change, which becomes daily more apparent, either becoming totally

An affecting instance of the love and fidelity of the dog was observed at poor Mary's death. Her little dog, "whom they could never separate from her without doing violence to Her Majesty, as they were lifting her dead body off the

upon the Disposal of Oliver the Protector's Body," pp. 288-291, vol. i. of Rev. Mark Noble's "Memoirs of the Protectoral House of Cromwell," 3rd edit., 8vo, London, 1787.

I have a curious pamphlet entitled "Narrative relating to the real Embalmed Head of Oliver Cromwell, now exhibiting in Mead-court, in Old Bond-street, 1799." It gives a long account of the head, stating that it was supposed to have been blown off the top of Westminster Hall on a stormy night in the latter end of the reign of Charles II. or the beginning of that of James II., and afterwards preserved in the Russell family, &c. This head or skull of Oliver Cromwell is probably that now in the possession of Mr. W. A. Wilkinson, of Beckenham, Kent.

My conclusions are that the body most probably remained buried at Tyburn, but that the head seems to have been preserved to the present time.

HENRY W. HENFREY, F.R.Hist.S., &c.

« AnteriorContinuar »