UC-NRLF
B M D73 EDI
a .
THE TOMBS OF THE ARCHBISHOPS
IN CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL.
BY
JOHN MORRIS, S.J., F.S.A.
Author 0/ " The Life of St. Thomas Becket," " The Relics oj
St. Thomas of Canterbury, ^^ ^c.
Canterbury :
EDWARD CROW, MERCERY LANE.
MDCCCXC.
5 3 > a 3 }
»
< c c c c c c
THE TOMBS OF THE ARCHBISHOPS
IN CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL.
BV
JOHN MORRIS, S.J., F.S.A.
Author of " The Life of St. Thomas Becket," " The Relics of
St. Thomas of Canterbury " cfc.
I
Canterbury j
EDWARD CROW, MERCERY LANE.
MDCCCXC.
I
►fENRY MORSE STEI-HEHa
The Tombs of the A rchbishops in
Ca)iterbury Cathedral.
The widespread interest excited by the problem of the rightful
ownership of the tomb that was examined in Canterbury
Cathedral on March 8 and lo, 1890, justifies an attempt to
put on record the conclusions that have been reached respecting
that tomb, and an opportunity is thus afforded of a few words
respecting some of the other tombs of Archbishops which
present matter for discussion. The tomb lately opened has
held quite an exceptional position amongst the tombs in the
Cathedral. It is unlike the others in appearance, and looks
more like a shrine than an ordinary tomb. A conjecture
often repeated suggested that as, at the destruction by fire
of this part of the Cathedral in 1174, the monks, according
to Gervase, cast down from various beams the shrines of the
saints, this tomb might possibly have been made to receive
the fragments of the shrines, together with what remained
of their contents. This rumour has now been set at rest
for ever, as the monument was found on examination to cover
a stone coffin, and to contain nothing else.
ARCHBISHOP HUBERT WALTER, I205.
Within that stone coffin lay the desiccated body of an
Archbishop in full pontificals. All that had been made of
linen or of wool had perished. Under the silken vestments
no trace remained of clothing, but there was a haircloth band
round the waist. The alb had gone, but the front apparels of
silk belonging to it were in their proper places. The pallium
also had decayed, but two pins that fastened it were on the
shoulders— a third was looked for in vain — and two pieces of lead
with their silk coverings were there. Indeed, in one of the pieces
of lead, protected by it and the silk, a small portion of the
wool of the pallium has survived. The mitre on the head
was of silk, and as the threads with which it had been sewn
6 The Tombs of the Archbishops
had decayed, it was easy to see how the oblong piece of silk
was folded to form the mitre. The chasuble was ample, the
orphreys forming an inverted A at the bottom, the arrangement
resembling that of the orphreys of the chasuble of St. Thomas
at Sens, except that the bars which are double there are single
here, and it was bordered by a very beautiful narrow band
of lace. The pattern of the silk of the dalmatic was different
from that of the chasuble, the designs of both being very
rich. These vestments are twelfth century work ; the stole
older still, probably dating back to the time of Lanfranc. The
buskins are of silk, embroidered in lozenges which are filled
with beautiful crosses and other designs. The sandals are
low boots, also of silk, adorned with little stones, and em-
broidered very beautifully with quaint monsters and patterns.
The ring contains a Gnostic gem, engraved with a serpent
and the name of the god Chiuphis. The chalice in silver
parcel gilt resembles a modern ciborium ; the paten has on it
an Agnus Dei with an appropriate inscription, and on the
outer rim is this elegiac couplet :
Ara crucis, tumulique calyx, lapidisque patena,
Sindonis officium Candida bissus habet.
The lettering is of the time of Henry the Second. These lines,
which are also found on a portable altar in the Church of
St. Mary in Capitol, at Cologne,^ of the twelfth century, may
be rendered thus :
His Cross the altar, and His sepulchre
The chalice, and the stone with which 'twas closed
The paten, and this folded linen fair
The winding-sheet in which His limbs reposed.
A light pastoral staff of cedar wood with a knop containing
three engraved gems (the fourth has been lost), and a very
simple volute or head, rested on the body from the right foot
to the left shoulder, one hand being beneath it and the other
resting on it. It is probable that the maniple and the gloves
were of linen, as no trace of them remains.
The place occupied by this most interesting tomb is the
south wall of the aisle of the Trinity Chapel, which chapel
1 In our case, by inserting the que after tumuli, the first syllable of iyx has
very properly been made short. The German inscription runs thus :
Quicquid in altari punctatur spirituali,
lUud in altari completur material!.
Ara crucis, tumuli calyx, lapidisque patena,
Sindonis officium Candida byssus habet.
in Canterbury Cathedral. 7
was built to receive the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury,
and was finished in 11 84. It is now ascertained from a Hst
of Archbishops, to which fuller reference will shortly be made,
that this is the tomb of Archbishop Hubert Walter, who died
in 1205. It is his body that has been lately seen. These are
his vestments, his ring, his chalice and paten, and his crozicr,
that have aroused so much interest, and teach us such valuable
lessons in the history of art as to condone the rifling of his
tomb. The Society of Antiquaries of London will engrave
the whole collection in the Vetusta Monumenta. Another tomb
in the Cathedral has hitherto gone by Hubert Walter's name,
and it says much for the acumen and felicity of judgment
of Canon Scott Robertson, that he should nine years ago have
pointed out this tomb as Hubert Walter's. It then went by
the name of Theobald's, who died in 1161. It will interest
the reader to have the tradition respecting the tomb traced
for him. The true solution had not occurred even to so careful
and accurate an inquirer as Professor Willis. This is what
he says :
Unfortunately, out of fifty Archbishops and distinguished personages
before the Reformation, the locality of whose tombs or shrines have
been recorded, only about eighteen monuments are left, many of which
are in a greater or less state of dilapidation. With one exception,
however, they are all securely appropriated to their respective owners,
and thus dated, which greatly increases their value and use for the
history of art. Their positions are so minutely described by Archbishop
Parker at a period when all the inscriptions remained, that there can
be no mistake in this respect.
Here we may say that a manuscript list of Archbishops,
the original of which was taken from Canterbury by Archbishop
Parker, and deposited by him in the Corpus Library at
Cambridge, of which manuscript a copy in Henry Wharton's
handwriting is accessible at Lambeth Palace, will no doubt
for the future supersede Parker's own descriptions, for it is
more ancient and trustworthy. In the case of Hubert Walter
himself. Professor Willis, following Parker in his mistake,
assigns for the place of Hubert Walter's tomb "the south
wall of the choir aisle." The manuscript list that corrects
this error for us tells us that Hubert Walter lies " near the
shrine of St. Thomas," which is the position of the tomb
under examination. That list was written by a monk of
Canterbury between 1532 and 1538, and on the margin (not
8 The Tombs of the Archbishops
copied by Wharton) of the original entry respecting Hubert
Walter, Josselin, Archbishop Parker's secretary, has written,
"othenvise, under the window on the south side." This
window is in the choir aisle, and this note of Josselin's shows
us that Parker meant the position under the window in the
choir aisle, and thus adopted, if he did not originate, the
mistake that Hubert Walter was buried there.
Professor Willis continues, with reference to the tomb lately
opened, that " the exception just mentioned " by him, that is
to say, the exception amongst all the tombs, which otherwise
are " securely appropriated to their respective owners,"
is a tomb which now stands on the south side of the Trinity Chapel ;
its sides are decorated with an arcade of trefoil arches, resting on
shafts which have round abacuses and bases, and the style seems
a little later than the completion of the Trinity Chapel. No record
of a monument on this spot is preserved, and if, as is probable, it has
been moved from its original site, all clue to its history is gone. It
may have been constructed after the completion of the church, to
receive the bones of some of the Archbishops who had been removed.
It is usually attributed to Archbishop Theobald, but without reason,
and is too late in style. (Willis, p. 128.)
We now know that this tomb has not been removed from
its original site, for its contents have rested undisturbed since
first they were placed there in 1205. It was not erected to
receive the bones of some of the Archbishops who were
removed, and it is wonderful that Professor Willis, who assigns
to them all their places in the church, should have thought
it possible. And it is no longer true that no record of a
monument in this spot is preserved, for the Corpus MS.
indicates it unmistakeably as Hubert Walter's. One important
result therefore of the recent investigation is the correction
of this passage in the invaluable book of Professor Willis on
Canterbury Cathedral.
ARCHBISHOP THEOBALD, II61.
The Professor states with great positiveness, and at the
same time, no doubt, with perfect truth, that this tomb is not
Archbishop Theobald's. Yet, if it were not for positive evidence
assigning it to Archbishop Walter, it might have been possible
to have made out something of a case for Theobald, once
Abbot of Bee, the Archbishop who crowned Henry the Second,
and who, dying in 1161, was succeeded by St. Thomas of
in Canterbury Cathedral. 9
Canterbury. The story of his removal from his original resting-
place, nineteen years after his burial, is sufficiently interesting
to be told in full.
Gervase says that in the old Trinity Chapel Lanfranc lay
on the south side, Theobald on the north. And when that
Trinity Chapel, the work of St. Anselm and his Priors Ernulf
and Conrad, had been destroyed by fire in 1174, the bodies of
Lanfranc and Theobald who were buried in it, and of St. Odo
and St. Wilfrid who were enshrined in it, rested there amongst
the ruins for six years. Gervase himself was an eye-witness
of what was done with them in 11 80, and his account of the
opening of the tomb of Theobald is startlingly like what was
seen the other day. I go back a little, to make my extract
from Gervase complete, and I avail myself of Professor Willis's
translation, retaining, however, the right to alter a word when
necessary.
The Chapel of the Holy Trinity above mentioned was then levelled
to the ground ; this had hitherto remained untouched out of reverence
to St. Thomas, who was buried in the crypt. But the saints who
reposed in the upper part of the chapel were translated elsewhere, and
lest the memory of what was then done should be lost, I will record
somcAvhat thereof. On the 8th of the Ides of July the altar of the
Holy Trinity was broken up, and from its materials the altar of St. John
the Apostle was made ; I mention this lest the history of the holy stone
should be lost upon which St. Thomas celebrated his first Mass and
many times offered the Holy Sacrifice. The stone structure which was
behind this altar was taken to pieces. Here, as before said, St. Odo
and St. Wilfrid reposed for a long period. These saints were raised in
their leaden coffins and carried into the choir. St. Odo in his coffin
was placed under the shrine of St. Dunstan, and St. Wilfrid under the
shrine of St. Elphege.
Archbishop Lanfranc was found enclosed in a very heavy sheet of
lead, in which from the day of his first burial up to that day he had
rested his limbs, untouched, mitred, pinned,^ for sixty-nine years and
some months. He was carried into the vestry and replaced in the lead,
until the community should decide what should be done with so great
a father. When they opened the tomb of Archbishop Theobald, which
was built of marble slabs, and came to his coffin, the monks who were
present, expecting to find his body reduced to dust, brought wine and
water to wash his bones. But when the lid of the coffin was raised, he
was found entire and rigid, the bones and nerves, the skin and flesh
cohering, but attenuated. The bystanders marvelled at this sight, and
^ Spinulatus^ with the pins of his pallium.
io The Tombs of the Archbishops
touching him with their hands placed him on a bier, and so carried him
to Lanfranc in the vestry, that the Convent might resolve what would
be the most respectful manner of disposing of both. But the rumour
spread among the people, and already for this unwonted incorruption
many called him St. Theobald, He was shown to several who desired
to see him, and by them the tale was spread among the rest. He was
thus raised from his grave in the nineteenth year from his death, his
body being incorrupt and his silk vestments entire. By the decision of
the Convent he was buried in a leaden chest ^ before St. Mary's altar in
the nave of the Church, and this was what he had desired when living.
The marble tomb was put together over him as before. But Lanfranc
having remained, as aforesaid, untouched for sixty-nine years, his very
bones were consumed with rottenness, and nearly all reduced to dust.
The length of time, the damp vestments, the natural frigidity of the
lead, and, above all, the frailty of the human structure, had conspired
to produce this corruption. But the larger bones, with the remaining
dust, were collected in a leaden coffer, and deposited at the altar of
St. Martin. (Willis, p. 57.)
To the testimony of Gervase may be added that of Polistorie^
a MS. Chronicle in French of the first quarter of the fourteenth
century. This writer's account seems to be an echo of that of
Gervase, but he describes the place at the Lady Altar where
Theobald was buried with some distinctness.
Lan de grace mclx. ... En eel tems enmaladist le erseuesk de
Cauterbire Thebaud primat de Engleterre & legat de la Curt de Rome :
mes lan de grace mil clxi. de cele maladie languisaunt le an de sun
erseuesche xxij. la xiiij. Kl. de May a Caunterbire morust, et ilukes en
le eglise Ihu Cst fust enterre de coste lauter nostre dame p[ar] deuaunt
honurablement. Le cors de ly apres le xix an de sa sepulture entier
& red [raide] fust troue des os, nerfs, de pel & char, dunt poy [peu] hy
avoyt, mes tuts entieres se mustrerent les iointures.^
The marginal note is "De corpore Theobaldi Archiepi. integro
inuento post xix annos."
The question must now be discussed, whether the body of
Theobald remained there at the altar of the Blessed Virgin in
the nave, or whether there is any probability that it was trans-
ferred to the south aisle of the Trinity Chapel. I take the
greatest difficulty against its transfer first.
In the fifteenth volume of the ArcJiceologia, p. 291, there is a
paper which was read before the Society of Antiquaries of
1 Willis notes that in this case Gervase uses the word area, while in all the other
instances in this extract the word employed by him for a coffin is capsa,
' Harl. 636, fol. 118^'.
in Canterbury Cathedral. it
London on May 31 and June 7, 1804. The paper was drawn
up by Mr. Henry Boys, from the rough notes left by his father,
Sir John Boys, and it is acccompanied by an excellent print
of our tomb and of the leaden plaque that was buried with
Archbishop Theobald. This interesting plaque of lead seems
to have been sent to the Society of Antiquaries as a gift by
Mr. Boys, for it would be " more usefully preserved in their
collection than in the cabinet of any private person." Unfor-
tunately it is not known to exist. The drawing of it, from
which the engraving in the ArcJiceologia has been taken, is now
in one of the portfolios of the Society of Antiquaries, and
evidently represents the plaque more accurately than the
engraving. That it is our Archbishop Theobald's plaque there
cannot be a doubt. Mr. Boys says :
On the 20th of February, 1787, the workmen began to take up the
old pavement in the body of Canterbury Cathedral, and in levelling the
ground for the new pavement at the east end of the north aisle, a leaden
coffin was found a httle below the surface, containing the remains of a
body that had been wrapped in a robe of velvet or rich silk fringed
with gold ; these remains were much decayed. In the coffin was like-
wise enclosed an inscription on a plate of lead, in capital letters,
engraved in double strokes with a sharp-pointed instrument. The lead
is much broken and affected by the aerial acid, and the letters are
particularly so, the calx filling all the strokes, and rising above the
surface of the sounder metal ; from whence it appears that the un-
written surface was covered with paint or varnish, through which the
strokes were cut into the substance of the lead, and thereby left exposed
to the air. The letters are exceedingly well formed for that period ;
some of the abbreviations are curiously complex. I read the inscription
thus : [Hie requiescii\ venerabilis memo\i-icc\ Teob\_aldus\ Cantuarice
archiepiscopus Britannice primas d Apostolicce \Scdis legatus]. Ecclesia
Christi Diepehain adqui\_sivit proprio] argento et pluribus or[navit
operibus. Se\pultus [v]iiii. YA.\AIaii anno Domini MCLXI\
If, as Mr. Boys says, this inscription was found "in the coffin"
in which were the remains of a body in silk vestments, the
probability is very strong that that body was Archbishop
Theobald's. It is, however, curious that we can get further
back than the date of Mr. Boys' paper, and in doing so, instead
of assertions as positive as his, we meet only with surmises,
with a great diversity in the statement of facts. Ilasted's book
on Canterbury is dated December, 1800, and this is his account
of the finding of the body in the old Lady Chapel.
12 The Tombs of the Archbishops
On the removal of the earth for making the new pavement of the
nave, the stone coffin under this monument [that of Sir John Boys, who
died in 1612] was found with the outward side of it already broken to
pieces ; in it were three skulls, lying close together at one end, and a
number of bones in a heap promiscuously in the middle of it. Under
the window, eastward from this monument, there was found lying on
the foundation, which about three feet under the surface projected hke
a shelf, a skeleton, the body of which had been to all appearance
richly habited ; some of the materials of the cloathing remained in small
pieces or tatters, seemingly a stuff of gold tissue, and a piece of a
leaden plate, on which could be read ARCHIEP and the word
PRIMAS, seemingly very antient; the remaining part of the lead had
crumbled away. These, perhaps, were the remains of Archbishop
Theobald, who was buried somewhere hereabouts in the year 1184
[ii8o].^
It is remarkable that Hasted should have seen one
part of the plaque, but not the other fragment which contains
Theobald's name. To our purpose it is important to observe
that he makes no mention of any cofifin whatever, within which
the plaque might be found. On the contrary, he expressly
says that the skeleton was " found lying on the foundation " of
the aisle wall, " which about three feet under the surface pro-
jected like a shelf." Hasted tells us that "on searching the
graves. and moving the remains of those anciently buried in
this nave, for new making of the ground to lay the present new
pavement on, it was then found that this was not the first time
these depositories of the dead had been disturbed, for every
cofifin had been opened and ransacked."^ Of the particular
place with which we are now concerned,, this receives sad proof
from the statement he has just made to us of the stone coffin
that had been so violently used that its side was broken to
pieces, in which three skulls were at one end, and a heap of bones
in the middle. It seems clear that no leaden coffin was found in
1787. That \he plaque there found is Theobald's is indubitable ;
that it should have been found near the place where Theobald's
body unquestionably lay for awhile is most natural ; that the
plaque should be bought from the workmen by Sir John Boys
might well be expected, as this was the spot where his kins-
man Sir John Boys was buried ; but that the plaque was found
in a bishop's coffin has not been established, much less that
that coffin was undisturbed. In making Dr. Anian's grave in
^ History of Canterbury ^ vol. i. p. 391, note R. ' Ibici. vol. i. p. 384.
in Canterbury Cathedral. 13
January, 1632, close to the tomb of Sir John Boys, the plaque of
Archbishop Richard, who succeeded St. Thomas, was found, as
Somner tells us,^ together with his cope, crozier, and chalice.
This Somner says was " on the north side of the body \i.e. the
nave], towards the upper end," and, therefore, very close to the
place spoken of by Hasted where the skeleton was found on
the foundation of the aisle wall. Theobald had a marble tomb
re-erected over him at the Lady Altar, as we learn from Gervase;
he was buried " a coste lauter nostre Dame par devaunt,"
according to Polistorie, and it would seem probable that
Theobald's marble tomb will have been on the south, if Richard
in 1 183 was buried on the north side. Theobald's //^^//^ would
be thrown about and displaced as the earth was several times
disturbed. And we may assume that Theobald rested there till
the spoliators came and ruthlessly mingled the bones of the
ancient rulers of the Cathedral and removed them, we know not
whither. Not that a transfer would have been impossible even
if unrecorded. We know that SS. Odo and Wilfrid were placed
in their leaden coffins beneath the shrines of SS. Dunstan and
Elphege on either side of the high altar. Willis tells us that
this was " as a temporary resting-place only," and his reason
for so saying is that in a later list of relics he finds that they
were in the Corona in the fourteenth century. Yet Gervase
leaves them at the high altar, and if no such subsequent list had
been forthcoming, the historians of the church^ would have all
declared that there they still were, just as they insist that
Theobald, or what is left of him, is, if not carried out of the
church by the spoilers, still in the old chapel of the Blessed
Virgin in the nave aisle.
We are not saying that it is not so, for documentary
evidence shows that as a matter of fact Theobald was not
transferred, and the tradition is erroneous which saj-s that our
tomb is his burial-place. When /^c//.y/t>/7t' was written in 13 13,
we should not have been told that he was buried by the Lady
altar, if by that time he had been removed ; and the excellent
list of 1532 would not have said that "he is buried in the nave
of the church." In 13 13, the Lady altar was in the nave aisle;
1 Willis, p. 37, note J. ; Somner, p. 92, Dart (p. 129) wrongly says it was
Dr. ^Vucher's, who died in I "joo,
2 Dart (p. 109. ), forgetting Prior Eastry's list which he prints in his Appendix,
says that St. Odo's bones still continue under the feretory of St. Dunstan, without
any monument.
14 The To7nbs of the Archbishops
it disappeared when Archbishop Sudbury pulled down Lanfranc's
ruinous nave in 1378; and when the list of 1532 was written,
Prior Goldston had long since finished the new Lady Chapel on
the east side of the Martyrdom. The two writers, then, by their
different phrases are indicating the same place in the church.
But though Theobald remained there till the barbarians of
the eighteenth century destroyed all trace of his tomb, his body
no doubt having lost after its reburial in lead the wonderful
state of preservation that so surprised the beholders in Gervase's
time, yet the tradition, that the tomb lately opened was really
his, has lasted a long time, withstanding the earnest assaults of
historians like Somner and Battely. The very books that deny
the truth of the tradition, in some sort testify to it by printing
the words " Archbishop Theobald's tomb " on their plates of the
tomb in the Trinity Chapel aisle, and in their plans of the
Cathedral. Sir John Boys associates the name of Theobald so
closely with the tomb, though he writes to prove that his body
has been found elsewhere, that he invents the absurd hypothesis
of " a superb monument erected to the memory of Theobald at
a period distant from his death, and in a situation distant from
his remains." It is still more curious that a "table" representing
Theobald and his acts at one time hung over the tomb. If it
was, as Battely says, " lately made," it was one of a series of
placards engrossed on parchment, which are dated 1665. This
was the time when the Cathedral was reopened after the ill-
treatment it underwent in Cromwell's time, and the table gives
us the tradition existing at the Restoration.
" TABLES."
The mention of this " table," or, as we should call it, " tablet,"
of Theobald and his acts may justify a few words respecting the
other " tables " that we know to have existed on the tombs in
the church. It would appear that almost all the " tables " had
been misplaced. Weever asserts that he found that Lanfranc
was buried in the church " by a table inscribed, which hangs
upon his tomb." " Erroneously," is Somner's comment, " for
there is neither tomb nor table of his there." Theobald's we
have seen was displaced, for it was on the tomb we now know
to be Hubert Walter's. There was a " table " for Odo, and it
had found its way to Archbishop Sudbury's tomb. " There
indeed," says Somner, " shall you find a tabic hanging, epito-
mizing the story of his [Odo's] life and acts — not without a
171 Canterbury Cathedral.
15
great mistake." Archbishop Mepham's " tomb is that whereon
by error Archbishop Sudbury's table hangs." And when he
comes to Sudbury, Somncr repeats : " His tomb is that (as in
>■ ~ ■) "tables,"
) says of
lay easily
) pillars on
fair tomb
,vin, in his
lat he saw
he thought
ne one, he
tion. The
truction of
pie of one
Abbey at
.rch monks
;een in the
e name of
;11, done at
one of an
IS the later
iting. The
d they are
," are evi-
,ay perhaps
al tradition
. lb, we may
mA i riking than
^^^"istify us in
^^Jgi upon our
-^■te ourselves
.\ } still more
ancient Archbishop, who certainly rested for a time in the
Corona, not far from our tomb, and who very probably was
placed later on beside, or near to, the tomb we now call Hubert
Walter's. The Archbishop in question is the Saxon St-.-Odo,
1 Somner, Antiquities of Canterhtry, London, 1640, pp. 236, 241, 262—265.
C^ t « AAAA^tf WN^
14
The Tombs of the Archbishops
Z ^- lu .
CC y ii. CD
T 5 9 i^'
it disappeared when Archbishop Sudbury pulled down Lanfranc's
ruinous nave in 1378; and when the list of 1532 was written,
Prior Goldston had long since finished the new Lady Chapel on
the east sid - - -
different pi
But the
the eightee
no doubt
state of pre
time, yet tl ^ ■ O g :3 "
his, has laf CD ? '^ **
historians 1 -5 '^ 5
the truth o
the words '
tomb in tl
Cathedral,
closely witi
has been fc
of " a supe
a period di
his remains
Theobald e
was, as Ba
placards ei
was the tii
treatment
us the trad
The me
of Theobal
other " tabl
the church,
been mispl;
was buried
upon his t
there is ne „. ...^ .„^.^. ^..^^^^.^^ „v,
have seen was displaced, for it was on the tomb we now know
to be Hubert Walter's. There was a " table " for Odo, and it
had found its way to Archbishop Sudbury's tomb. " There
indeed," says Somner, " shall you find a table hanging, epito-
mizing the story of his [Odo's] life and acts — not without a
in Canterbury Cathedral. 15
great mistake." Archbishop Mepham's " tomb is that whereon
by error Archbishop Sudbury's table hangs." And when he
comes to Sudbur}', Somner repeats : " His tomb is that (as in
Odo I told you) whereon Odo's table hangs." Two " tables,"
at all events, were in their proper places, for he says of
Stratford : " By the table hanging whereon you may easily
find it," and of Wittlesey, that he lies " between two pillars on
the south side of the body of the Church, under a fair tomb
inlaid with brass, as his table will direct." ^ Godwin, in his
Latin edition (1616), complains that the "tables" that he saw
at the tomb of Walter Reynolds, and at that which he thought
was Hubert Walter's, had been taken away by some one, he
knew not whom. Of these Somner makes no mention. The
custom of putting " tables " on tombs for the instruction of
strangers was an ancient one. There is an example of one
in the year 1406 at St. Augustine's tomb in his Abbey at
Canterbury, which gave offence to the Christ Church monks
by stating the priority of foundation of that Abbey.
The " table " for Wittlesey's tomb is still to be seen in the
Cathedral library, written in 1665 by a man of the name of
R. Hoare. Those of Bradwardin, Islip, and Arundell, done at
the same time, are also preserved. There remains one of an
earlier series, that of Islip, word for word the same as the later
one, but much more worn and in an earlier handwriting. The
matter in these " tables " is taken from Parker, and they are
written in Latin. These post-Reformation "tables" are evi-
dently those that Godwin and Somner allude to.
ARCHBISHOP ST. ODO, 958.
The interesting character of these " tables " may perhaps
justify this digression ; but now to return to the local tradition
respecting Theobald's claim to Hubert Walter's tomb, we may
proceed to give another piece of evidence more striking than
any that have gone before. Its production will justify us in
turning our attention from Theobald, whose claim upon our
tomb must be abandoned, and will cause us to devote ourselves
for awhile to the examination of the case of a still more
ancient Archbishop, who certainly rested for a time in the
Corona, not far from our tomb, and who very probably was
placed later on beside, or near to, the tomb we now call Hubert
Walter's. The Archbishop in question is the Saxon St. Odo,
^ Somner, Atitiqiiities of Canierl>2iry, London, 1640, pp. 236, 241, 262 — 265.
1 6 The Tombs of the Archbishops
the immediate predecessor of St. Dunstan, whose habit it was
to call him " Odo the Good." From Eadmer we learn that
Odo, the twenty-second Archbishop of Canterbury, brought
the relics of St. Wilfrid from Ripon in the year 957, and placed
them in the altar, "of rough stones and mortar" against the
wall of the eastern apse of the Saxon Cathedral. St. Odo's own
tomb was on the south side of the high altar of that Cathedral,
and it is not without importance to notice that it was described
as " in the form of a pyramis."
This church was found by Lanfranc in ruins, and he rebuilt
the nave, and St. Anselm, or rather his Priors Ernulf and
Conrad, the choir. From Gervase we learn that, behind
St. Anselm's choir, in the Chapel of the Blessed Trinity where
St. Thomas used to say Mass, beside the altar and quite against
the east wall, on the right, that is the south side, was St. Odo,
on the left, or north side, was St. Wilfrid of York ; to the
south, close to the wall, the venerable Archbishop Lanfranc,
and to the north Theobald.^ For "when the high altar of
the old church was taken down, the relics of the Blessed
Wilfrid were found and placed in a coffer, and after some
years a sepulchre was prepared for them on the north side
of an altar, in which they were reverently inclosed on [St.
Wilfrid's day] the 12th of October." And a story is told
by Gervase of a bright light seen in the church while angels
performed the service, who went to the shrine of St. Wilfrid
for a blessing before the lections.^
When the choir had been burnt in 1174, the same contem-
porary authority tells us that on July 8, 11 80, when William the
Englishman was planning the new Trinity Chapel, St. Odo and
St. Wilfrid were raised in their leaden coffins and carried into
the choir, St. Odo, in his coffin, was placed under the shrine of
St. Dunstan, which was on the south side of the new high altar,
and St. Wilfrid under the shrine of St. Elphege, on the north side
of the high altar. There Gervase leaves them, but we know
from a list of relics made in the time of Prior Eastry,^ in 1321,
that St. Odo was then in a shrine in the Corona on the south
side, and St. Wilfrid in a shrine also in the Corona on the
north side. Corpus S. Odonis in fcretro ad Coronam versus
austruvi. Corpus S. Wilfridi iu feretro ad Coronam versus
aquilonem}
1 Willis, p. 46. ^ 3iJ, p. 16. ^ Ibid. p. 56, note Q; p. 113, note E.
* Galba, E. iv, f, 122 ; Dart, Append, xiii.
in Canterbury Cathedral. 17
We now come to a new witness, Richard Scarlett/' a lover of
heraldry, who visited the Cathedral in 1599. In his first visit to
the east end of the church, besides the quarterings on the tombs
of Cardinal Pole and Dean Wootton, two things struck him : the
one " a old monument of marble wherein was buryed Theo-
baldus, Archbishop of Canterburye, dyed a boute 900 yeares
a goo : " the other, " Odo, Archbishop and died An^ 958, and
lyeth in a fayre monument of marble." This last entry was
originally " 700 yeare a goo," which put St. Odo two centuries
after Theobald, whose antiquity the writer of the note has just
doubled. The information our visitor got from the "tables " on
the spot was not entirely accurate, and he had not knowledge
enough of his own to rectify it. However, the year 958, which
he has subsequently entered as the year of St. Odo's death, is
near enough, but Theobald's date he has not corrected, in this
note at least.
On his next visit he has taken the tombs of all the Arch-
bishops he could find, and he has arranged them in chrono-
logical order. IsHp's and Warham's dates he has not noted,
and he enters them out of order. He has made some other
curious mistakes. He begins with Lanfranc, whom he places
" at the feet of St. Anselm." This is a reminiscence of the fact
that St. Anselm was originally buried at the head of Lanfranc
in his own Trinity Chapel, but he was thence translated to the
Chapel of SS. Peter and Paul, which thereupon took his name :
and Lanfranc, so far from being at the feet of St. Anselm, was
removed in 11 80 to the altar of St. Martin, on the north side of
the church.
Our visitor makes next the curious error of the substitution
of an e for the last stroke of the in in St. Anselm's name, for
which we can only account by believing him to have misread
the " table " that gave an account of St. Anselm. He calls him
" St. Anselyne," and he does not know for certain which was
his chapel, saying, " I take it to bee on the south syde of the
high altar," in which he guesses rightl}-.
Another blunder shows that he knows nothing of archi-
tecture, for of Archbishop Arundell he tells us that " he built
Arundell Steple, and gave the Bells, and dyed in Januar}-,
1 41 3." It does not seem strange to him that a man who
died in 141 3 should have built Lanfranc's Norman north-west
tower. It is to be said for him that Parker and Godwin make
' Had. 1366, fol. 13,
1 8 The Tombs of the Archbishops
the same mistake. Our herald of 1599 was of the same opinion
as Gostling and Hasted, who ought to have known better, and
assigned what he calls Theobald's tomb to Saxon times. For he
was struck by its antiquity, which he thought might be 900
years, and of Odo's, which he apparently attributes to Odo's
own time, in the middle of the tenth century.
But we were engaged with his second visit to the church,
and in his notes of it his first entry is, " Odo lyeth on the south
syde of the high altar, in a tombe built with marble stone
after the forme of a piramis.^ He dyed An^ 958. Against
bischopp Courteneys tombc." And to this he attaches a pen
and ink sketch of St. Odo's tomb or shrine, which is so inter-
esting that a photograph has been taken of it in its actual size,
as well as enlarged. How exactly it corresponds with Hubert
Walter's tomb is thus seen at a glance.
Of Theobald, his entry on this second occasion is that he
" lyeth in the upp^ parte of the church (neere the black prince)
in a marble tomb, hee dyed An*^ 1160." He is this time
nearer to the correct date, but it should be April 18, 1161.
This error of a year is made by Parker likewise.
This pen and ink sketch so precisely corresponds with our
tomb, that not only the geometrical panelling is identical, but
the two heads given match exactly with the heads on Theo-
bald's— the first in a cap, the second in a mitre. The quatrefoils
could not be drawn because of the small dimensions of his
sketch, which is but an inch by three-quarters of an inch,
for which reason, also, we have no trefoils in the arcading.
Apparently we must take the intimation that this is Odo's
tomb, as one more error on Scarlett's part. He must have
written out his notes in chronological order after he left the
church, and when he came to reproduce his little sketch
^ Godwin, in his first edition of the Catalogue of the Bishops of England, by
F. G., Sub-Deane of Exceter, London, 1601, p. 20, just after Scarlett's visit, has the
same phrase. " He was buried on the south side of the high altar, in a tombe built
somewhat after the forme of a Pyramis." He goes on wrongly to say, " I take it to
be the tombe of ieate standing in the grate neer the steps that lead to S. Thomas
Chappell." This is Mepham's tomb, which in the edition of 1615, p. 62, he calls a
"tomb of touchstone " and in the Latin, ex Lydio lapide. Godwin does not say
it is in "the form of a pyramis'' because it is like Mepham, but he goes to Mepham
because he thinks it answers the description. St. Odo's first tomb in the Saxon church
is so described. Requievit cohonba supra inemoria>n beati Odonis, qua ad aiistralcm
partem altaris in viodum pyramidis exstrncta fuit. (Osbern's Life of St. Dunstan,
Anglia Sacra, 1691, vol. ii. p. no.) Somner blames Godwin for not remembering
that this is not the same church, but it is not clear that Godwin made this mistake,
Xlicoh jiiL^ ^^ iUJ*^ ^ -^^f^^^j^^ ]"**^ f"^ ^f/^
•.•„•..•
in Canterbury Cathedral. 19
of the shrine-Hke tomb, which certainly he has excellently
done, he must have forgotten to which of the two, Odo or
Theobald, it belonged. The word " piramis " will have been
also applicable no doubt to the smaller shrine that contained
St. Odo, or it even may have been another reminiscence of
what he had read about the Saxon Cathedral, and where the
word occurs in his notes, he was led to put the sketch of the
larger "piramis" that he had seen at the same time. It is
extremely improbable that he saw two tombs exactly alike in
the same place, one "against bischopp Courteney's tombe,"
the other " neere the Black Prince." If there were two alike,
they would have been stone shrines of St. Odo and St. Wilfrid
from the Corona ; but as we have the sketch, and see the
tomb corresponding with that sketch, and as we know from
Mr. St. John Hope's careful measurements and examination
that there is not room in the Corona for our tomb, we may
be sure that it is not the shrine of St. Odo or St. Wilfrid, and
further that it was certainly made for its present position.
But though Richard Scarlett has given the sketch to Odo
that he ought to have given to what he called Theobald, still it
seems plain from his description that St. Odo was there at that
time in the Trinity Chapel aisle. He saw two tombs, and not
one, and he believed that both Archbishops' bodies were there.
" Odo lyeth on the south syde of the high alter," " Theobald
lyeth buried neere the black prince." " Against bischopp
Courteneys tombe," means " opposite to " it, and the " pyramis "
we see, Walter's we call it, Theobald's was his name for it, is
exactly opposite to Archbishop Courtenay's alabaster monu-
ment. The other shrine he saw, St. Odo's, must have been
smaller than Walter's tomb, for it came from the Corona ; and
the singular return of the step still remaining on the south side
of the altar in the Corona, where St. Odo once was, seems to
indicate a change there, while St. Wilfrid on the north side
remained until he was unshrined by Henry the Eighth.
This supposes St. Odo to have been in the Trinity aisle, and
indeed either the words " against bischopp Courteneys tombe," or
more probably the other description, " neere the Black Prince,"
belong to his " piramis," or smaller shrine. Now we have a sup-
port for this surmise respecting St. Odo in the list of Archbishops
in the Corpus Librar)-. The monk of Canterbury, who wrote
while St. Thomas was still in his shrine, says that St. Odo "now
lies at the Corona of St. Thomas in the Chapel of the Holy
20 The Tombs of the Archbishops
Trinity on the right." ^ In the original, as Mr. Lewis, the Librarian
of Corpus, is good enough to say, there is no sign of correction,
but the words run on in one and the same handwriting. Still
the Corona is never styled " in the Trinity Chapel," and in this
entry we seem to find, first a statement that St. Odo was in the
Corona, which indeed we know from Prior Henry of Eastry,
and then a change, when perhaps the original was inadvertently
left, stating that St. Odo was in the Trinity Chapel on the right
hand side — the very position that the visitor of 1599 would
induce us to assign to his shrine.
And to this second witness that Odo was really in the
aisle of the Trinity Chapel we may add, as a third witness,
the " table " spoken of by Somner, which evidently once was
placed on Odo's shrine. We are thus brought to conclude
that long after the time of Henry the Eighth, some one, taking
a leaf out of King Henry's book, turned St. Odo and his shrine
out of the church. He had been saved from this indignity
when the other saints were unshrined by his unrecorded
transfer from his old place by the Corona altar, but it was
to meet the same fate later on, at some one else's hand. All
that we have left to us is a small platform, west of Hubert
Walter, and " near the Black Prince," the step in front of which
is worn, as if by pilgrims' knees. Is not this the last site of
St. Odo's shrine?-
SAXON ARCHBISHOrS.
We may turn to the Corpus manuscript for some information
respecting other Archbishops' tombs, but we must necessarily be
brief In all, from St. Augustine to Warham inclusively, our monk
gives us sixty-seven names. Of the thirty-two Saxon Archbishops
(he omits Damian, Elsine, and Brithelm, given by Dugdale),
eleven were buried in St. Augustine's Abbey, twelve appear in
his list as they are in Gervase, six he tells us have been moved,
and of Ethclnoth and the two who precede Lanfranc he is
silent. As these transfers are not mentioned by Parker, and
are unknown to Willis, it is well to say that Ffeogild and
Ceolnoth were enshrined on a beam at the entrance of the
' "S. Odo . . . modo jacet ad Coronam Sti. ThomK in capella Stse. Trinitatis ad
dextram."
- For this suggestion, which is quite new, and seems to me very interesting, I
am indebted to Mr. St. John Hope, the Assistant Secretary- of the Society of
Antiquaries.
in Canterbury Cathedral. 2t
Corona ; Adhelm and Wlf helm also on a beam, the one before
St. Gregory's altar, the other before St. John's. These three last,
together with Ethclnoth, about whom we are without subsequent
information, were before at St. Benedict's altar in Lanfranc's
church, and were disturbed by the rebuilding of the Martyrdom,
or by the building of the new Lady Chapel in the fifteenth
century. Ffeogild was in Gervase's time at St. Michael's altar.
He was thence moved to the high altar, for John Stone, a
Canterbury monk in 1467, records in his lilcnioranda that " in
1448, on the 24th of March, four Brothers of this church took
from the high altar the shrine with the bones of St. Ffeogild,
Archbishop of Canterbury, and carried it behind the Body of
our Lord to the shrine of St. Thomas, thence to the Corona of
St. Thomas, and placed the shrine on a beam between the
shrine of St. Thomas and the Corona of St. Thomas." Besides
this, Siricius was removed from the crypt to St. John's^ altar,
and St. Odo first to the Corona, and then, as we have seen, in
all probability to the Trinity Chapel on the south side.
ARCHBISHOPS AFTER THE CONQUEST.
There are thirty-five Archbishops from Lanfranc to Warham
inclusively. The writer of our list omits Reginald Joceline, but
inserts Thomas Langton, so that his total is the same as
Dugdale's, who reverses this. Of these, in accordance with
Gervase, he places Lanfranc at St. Martin's altar, St. Anselm in
his chapel, Theobald and Richard in the nave, meaning in the
old Lady Chapel, which had disappeared in his time. He
agrees with Henry of Eastry in placing St. Thomas in the
Trinity Chapel, St. Anselm in his own, St. Elphege and St. Dun-
stan at the high altar, St. Odo in the Corona, and St. Elfric at
St. John's, This last was buried at this altar in Gervase's time,
and enshrined there in Eastry's. Of Ralph de Turbine and
William Corboil our monk gives no indication : Gervase places
them to the left and right of the entrance of St. Benedict's
Chapel. John Ufford, who died before consecration, our list
places in the Martyrdom. William Wittlesey was " in the nave
before the image of Blessed Mary : " Thomas Arundell " in the
nave in the chapel founded by him."
* It is remarkable that the monk of 1532 always speaks of this altar as that of
St. John Baptist and St. John the Evangelist.
±2 The Tombs of the Archbishops
CARDINAL STEPHEN LANGTON, 1228.
Cardinal Stephen Langton, the writer of our list places
"in St. Michael's Chapel tinder the altar." He is the first
who makes mention of him in this place, unless Leland is
before him. Parker and Godwin corroborate the statement ;
and Scarlett in 1599 asserts very distinctly that Langton
" lyeth in the Chappell of St. Michaell on the south syde of
the churche neere the southe dore, w'^^ shulde seeme to bee
the Chappell Redyfyed by John Earle of Somersett, for ther
standyth yett the said monument whear the alter stood,
halfe in the wall and halfe owte." The Chapel of St. Michael
was rebuilt in 1439. Langton was buried in 1228, when
St. Michael's Chapel, like St. Benedict's on the other side of
the church, was but a little apse like those we now see in
the eastern transepts. Cardinal Langton, we learn from
Polistorie, which was written in 13 13, " kaunt honurablement
en cele eglise fust mys en tere deuaunt lauter seint Michel."
We must look on the transfer of Langton from before to
beneath the altar of St. Michael's Chapel to have taken place
at the rebuilding in 1439. This testimony of Polistorie, that
Lanfranc was buried before the altar of St. Michael, relieves
us from a considerable difficulty. For Willis has said :
The stone coffin attributed to Stephen Langton, which is now built
into the wall of the Chapel of St. Michael, seems to have been originally
outside the wall in the churchyard ; and thus the new wall, when the
chapel was rebuilt and enlarged in the fourteenth century, was made to
stride over the coffin by means of an arch. (p. 129.)
If this coffin were once outside in the churchyard, it was
either not Stephen Langton's at all, or that great Cardinal
Archbishop, alone of the Archbishops of Canterbury, was buried
outside the church, and not only that, but his burial-place was
not even in the cemetery of the monks, but in that of the laity.
This some have attempted to account for by saying that he was
excommunicated when he died, which is not true ; and if it
were true, he would not have been buried in consecrated ground
as this was. Nor can it be said that though not excommuni-
cated, he was suspended from his archiepiscopal functions and
was buried as a simple priest, for as a matter of fact, the
cemetery to the east of St. Michael's Chapel was not that
where a simple priest would have been buried, as it was the
in Canterbiiry Cctthedral. 23
cemetery of laymen. The statement of Polistorie is valuable
as showing us that Cardinal Langton was, like the other Arch-
bishops, buried within the church before an altar, so that there
is no need to devise reasons why he should have been buried in
the churchyard at all. A far more difficult thing to assign a
reason for is, that he should have been finally buried under an
altar. The stone of the altar rested on his coffin, and by this
arrangement the cross on the coffin lid, which is now visible, was
then hidden. The front of the coffin shows that when it was
before the altar the coffin was in the ground, the lid alone
showing on the surface of the ground.
ARCHBISHOP PECKHAM, 1 292.
There is a very curious note in Scarlett's manuscript, which
has its value as showing various local traditions that have arisen
without any foundation. As we have had to reject one very
strong local tradition, which attached the name of Hubert
Walter to a later tomb, and another not less strong, which
called by Theobald's name Hubert Walter's tomb, it may be
instructive to see that there was once a tradition in Canterbury
Cathedral that Stigand, the deposed Archbishop, who made
way for Lanfranc, was buried there, and again that Peckham's
tomb was taken to be Ufford's :
In the Chapell of St. Thomas Beckett, a pen the monument of
John Ufford, is layed a verye old monument of a bishopp, w"' his myter
on his head, curyouslye cutt in hard oke and remayneth sound and
good : but from whens he was brought thyther I knowe not. He lyeth
loose a pon the top of the marble ston, and is by prescryption said to
be the picture of Stygauns the ^;r/i^bishop lyving at the comyg of
W" the Conqueror. And is lykely to be soo, because I have seen the
lyke cutt in oke of some noblemen that lyved at the Conquest tyme, as
for example one Lord Lovetoft, Lord of Worsop, who standeth in a
church there to be seene yett, and lyeth crosslegged in a wonderful old
arque, leaning on his swoord and a great target on his armes, whereon
was the Lovetofts armes : all cutt out of oke and was so hard that I
could scarselye enter a dagger poynt in to yt.
Rich. Scarlett.
The writer has scored out all the preceding notes, and he
has added this correction : " Stygan doth not lie in the sayde
churche, as it is reportyd." (fol. 18.)
1 Ei:asec1.
ijj. The Tombs of the Aj'chbishops
The previous entry Scarlett had made respecting this tomb
runs thus : " John Ufford, brother to the Earle of Suffolke, dyed
of the plague the vij^'^ of June An^ 1348 and is buried in
St. Thomas Chappell whereat hee hath a statlie tombe cutt in
wood'^ ston and all piraments gilt a pon him a marble ston
whearon is no armes nor wrytinge." (fol. 13.)
St. Thomas's Chapel,^ the term also used by Scarlett for the
place of burial of Archbishops Stafford, Deane, and Warham, is
the Martyrdom; and the monk of 1532 contents himself with
assigning the Martyrdom as Ufford's burial-place. Parker's
phrase in the early unpublished edition of 1572 is translated
by Godwin thus : "His body without any pompe or wonted
solemnity was carried to Canterbury, and there secretly buried
by the north wall, beside the wall of Thomas Becket." To this
Godwin added in his first black letter editions of his " Catalogue
of Bishops," published in 1601 and 161 5, "at that place (if
I mistake not) where we see an olde woodden tombe neere to the
tombe of Bishop Warham."
Hasted's conjecture respecting the wooden effigy is curious.
" It seems singular," he says, " that the figure should have been
left so entirely plain when all the rest of the tomb is profusely
decorated with painting and gilding. It has been conjectured
by some that this was a conventional figure used to place on the
tomb immediately after the interment of an Archbishop, until
such time as his monument was ready."
Hasted says that Ufford "does not seem to have had any
monument erected for him, though that remaining there now
beside Warham's tomb, and allowed by most to be that of
Archbishop Peckham, has been by some conjectured to have
been erected for Archbishop Ufford, whose gravestone is still to
be seen in the pavement in the Martyrdom, though it has been
for a long time robbed of its brasses."
In assigning Beckham's tomb to Ufford, the tradition of the
Cathedral in the sixteenth century has again gone wrong,
Scarlett and Godwin have been misled by it at the same time.
In Scarlett's list of tombs there is no mention of Archbishop
Peckham.
Godwin has nothing more to say of Peckham than that " he
was buried in his owne church, but in what particular place
I finde not." A manuscript note in the British Museum copy
2 This is interesting, as Willis says (p. 62) that the Trinity chapel "is always
called the Chapel of St. Thomas."
171 Canterbury CathedraL 25
of Godwin's second edition shows how Somner set this matter
right :
Archbishop Parker, as well as Bishop Godwin, found not the parti-
cular place where Archbishop Peckham was buried. But by a record
(sayth Mr. Somner, in his Antiq. of Cant. p. 286) in the church of the
time of his death and place of the buriall of this Archbishop, it appears
he was laid /// parte aquihviari, juxta locum Martyrii beati Thoma
Marty ris} Mr. Somner fears the author of the tables hath done him
some wrong in hanging Archbishop Ufford's table upon that w^'' (as he
takes it) was rather Peckham's tombe than his, that namely in the corner
of the Martyrdom next unto Warham, w"^'* the table writer upon Bishop
Godwin's conjecture takes for granted to be Ufford's tombe. But (as
Mr. Somner conceives) the cost bestowed on that monument (however
the archiepiscopall effigies w*^'' it hath is framed of wood) being built
somewhat pyramis-like, and richly overlayd with gold, w*^'' is not yet
worne off, gainsays it to be Ufford's. For 'tis said that he dying before
he was fully Archbishop, having never received either his pall or his
consecration, and that in the time of the great plague, w*^"^ (as Walsing-
ham reports) consumed 9 parts of the men throughout England, his
body without any pomp or wonted solemnity was carried to Canterbury,
and there secretly buried by the north wall, beside the wall of Thomas
Becket.
The monk of 1532 gives this little contribution to the over-
throw of the sixteenth century tradition, inasmuch as, according
to him, both Peckham and Ufford were buried at the Martyr-
dom, but of Peckham alone he says that his place of burial is
" in the wall."
ARCHBISHOP ROBERT WINCHELSEY, I313.
There is nothing new to be said about Robert Winchelsey's
tomb, but there is a full account of his funeral in the French
chronicle of Canterbury, called Polistorie, which has probably
never appeared in an English dress. It was written in 13 13,
the very year of his death, and the chronicle ends with the
election first of Master Thomas de Cobham, and next of " Syre
Water Renaud," that is to say, Walter Reynolds, Bishop of
Worcester and his enthronement by Prior Henry of Eastry, in
the presence of eight of the Bishops of the province. The
funeral of Robert Winchelsey is therefore described while its
memory was still fresh, and this may account for the detail
with which it is told :
^ Willis gives the reference, Regist. Ecc. Cant, Aug. Sac. i. 117.
26 The Tombs of the Archbishops
In the year of grace 13 13, the 11"' of May, on a Friday, at Otford
died Robert de Wynchelesee, Archbishop of Canterbury, when he had
held the see 18 years, 34 weeks, and 6 days. His body was carried to
Canterbury, and on the 21^"^ of May, on the way to his mother church, it
rested in the church of the Hospital of St. James without the city. The
Convent of Jesus Christ our Saviour came thither in procession. Thirteen
monks only vested in albs in that church, the rest made the lines, and
carried the body to the gate of the cemetery of their mother church,
the convent going before in frocks according to their usage. At the
gate abovesaid the procession of the convent was met by the Bishops of
Winchester, of Bath, Ely, and Llandafif, and the prayer was said by the
Bishop of Llandaff, John de Monemue,^ who was the first Bishop of them
all. The thirteen monks vested as aforesaid took copes which the
sacristan brought them, and they carried the body honourably across
the choir up to the Prior's chapel.
On Tuesday at the hour of noon, when the convent was sleeping at
mid-day, the body was carried before terce from the chapel to the choir
by six monks, Prior Henry being present, and was honourably placed
on the pavement before the high altar. That same day without loss of
time after Vespers all the convent was vested in albs and the Bishops
were vested to sing the dirge : the first lesson of which, with the chanter's
garnish, was read by the Prior of Leedes, the second by the Abbot ot
Langdon, the third by the Abbot of St, Radegund, the fourth by the
Abbot of Liesnes, the fifth by the Abbot of Battle, the sixth by the
Abbot of Feversham,- the seventh by the Bishop of Ely, the eighth by
the Bishop of Winchester, and the ninth by the Bishop of Llandaff. All
the responses the monks chanted two and two, except the third which
was sung by four, the sixth which was sung by five, and the ninth which
the precentor sung with five monks. And all six monks, vested in copes,
then chanted three verses, to wit, Timor inagnus, Dies illa^ and Nunc
Christe.
The day after, the Wednesday, John de Monumue, Bishop of
Llandaff, solemnly celebrated Mass for the dead, and after the Gospel
made a sermon to the people, and his theme was, Nii?n ignoratis quod
priuceps magnus hodie cecidit in Israel, Abner nomine ? " Know you not
that this day a great prince hath fallen in Israel, Abner by name ? "
When the Mass was said, these same Bishops performed the exequies
with due devotion, and the body was buried in the same church on the
south side before the altar of St. Gregory the Pope.^
* John of Monmouth was named Bishop of Llandaff in March 1295, and conse-
crated in February 1296. The other three Bishops, Winchester, Bath and Wells,
and Ely, are mentioned in the order of their seniority. It is noteworthy that no
precedence was given to Winchester.
^ Two were houses of Black Canons, Leedes Priory and Lesnes Abbey or
Westwood in Erith, and two of \Miite Canons or Premonstratensians, West Langdon
Abbey and St. Radegund or Bradsole near Dover. The other two were Benedictine
Abbeys. All these monasteries were in Kent, except Battle Abbey.
3 H^rl. MS. 636, fol. 233 b.
in Canterbury Cathedral. 27
The monk of 1532 has nothing furthpr'tf?. saj^.q'f WiiVcholsey's
burial-place than this, except that it was ''in the, wall," *God\yin
says, "His tombe, which was sita9tQ'.*\l3Q?iidfc \thc.', aitar; • of
St. Gregory neare the south wal, was afterwards pulled down."
Parker adds the reason, that the people held him after death as
a saint and came in numbers to worship him. Leland was at
Canterbur}' before its destruction and saj's that he was buried
" in a right godly tumbe of marble, at the ver)' but ende yn the
waulle side." When Scarlett came in 1 599 it was all gone, and
he makes no mention of it whatever. It seems remarkable that
Henry's commissioners should have destroyed Winchelsey's
monument, for the offerings at it had long ceased,^ but the
veneration of the people, we must suppose, still in some sort
continued.
CARDINAL MORTON, 1 50O.
Scarlett's entry respecting this Cardinal Archbishop is :
" John Moorton built for himselfe a chappell and a verye fayer
tombe in the undercrofte, and died An° 1500. Of freeston, him
selfe lyeing thereon, garnished with the fawcon standing a pon a
ton, the Cardnall hatt and MM his armes standing hard by him
in the roof" (fol, 13a.)
The rebus requires a moor-fowl rather than a falcon on a
ton. The tomb was no doubt " very fair," that is, beautiful,
when Scarlett saw it in 1 599. It has gone through centuries of
ill-usage since then. Scarlett looked only to the monument,
and naturally thought that as in other cases, so also here, the
monument indicated the burial-place of the Archbishop. He
was buried not far off, no doubt, but it would seem to be a
mistake to think that Cardinal Morton is buried immediately
under his effigy. The monk of 1532 says that he is "buried
before the altar of Blessed Mary in the crypt." This is explained
to us by Godwin, who in his two black letter editions tells us
that " Moorton built while he lived a sumptuous chappell in the
undercrofte or vault which is under the quier. He lieth buried
in the said chappell under a marble stone. Howbeit a goodly
toombe is erected in memory of him upon the south side of the
chappell." This is unmistakeable, and Cardinal Morton therefore
lies in the crypt, to the north of his monument, and somewhat
^ The last offering at the tomb of Archbishop Winchelsey recorded by the
monastic treasurers was \']d. in the year 1375, sixty-two years after his death, and
there had been no offering for several years before. Dr. Sheppard's Introduction to
\he Litera: Cantuarienses, vol. i. p. liii.
28 The Tombs of the Archbishops
\vest\Nlrarct of th& ;a:nci<^nJ; altar of Our Lady of Undercroft. In
his will he desired to be- buried in front of our Lady's altar,
with'Dvrt' nT" necessary "ptTPp or expense. His executors, when
they had done this, went beyond their instructions, and erected
the handsome memorial to him that we see. It may be added
that in the sacristy of Stonyhurst College there is a skull which
is believed to be his. It probably was brought from Liege at
the transfer of the College early in this century, but there is no
record of any kind to say when it was given to the College.
ARCHBISHOP DEANE, 1503.
Scarlett, with the spelling on the tomb before his eyes,
having first written " Henrie Deane," erased the surname, and
substituted " Dene," giving as his arms " argent on a chevron
between three Cornish choughs proper, as many croziers or."
He transcribes a good part of his inscription. " Sometyme
Prior Prioratus de Langtona} deinde Bangorejisis ac successive
Sar. Epi, post re 7 no vero Jiuius a/tiss"''- Eccli^- Metropol^- Arc hi.
qui die siifi, 8ic. He dyed xvth day of ffebruary An°. 1502
[O. S]. Hee lieth on the ground in St. Thomas Chappell on
a marble ston in brasse." The monk's list only says that he
was " buried at the Martyrdom of St. Thomas the Martyr."
Godwin's account of his funeral is picturesque. " Deane died
at Lamhith. His body was conveighed to Feversam by water,
conducted with 33 watermen all apparrelled in blacke (a great
number of tapers burning day and night in the boate) and from
thence carried [by the same watermen on a bier Parser] to
Canterbury, where it was buried in the middle of the place
called the Martyrdom [as he had ordered in his will, Parker]
under a fair marble stone inlaid with brasse." Parker adds that
he set aside ^500 for the expenses of his funeral, and that his
chaplains Wolsey and Gardiner were his executors : two
historical names, better known than his own.
ARCHBISHOP WARHAM, 1 532.
" William Warham lyeth in St. Thomas Chappell on a statly
monument raysed vj yeards from the ground with these armes
on it, at the foote of Uffords tombe. Six coats, (i) gon." The
others are tricked by Scarlett thus : (2) London impaling
gules, a fcss between a goat's head erased, in chief, and in base
^ It should be Lauthona or Lanthonia se(unda near Gloucester.
in Canterbury Cathedral. 29
3 escallops argent (Warham) (3) Canterbury impaling Warham.
(4) Christchurch Priory. (5) argent, 2 chevronels azure between
3 Lancaster roses. (6) St. Thomas of Canterbury.
The monk whom we have called of 1532, because he must
have had his list still in his hands when Archbishop Warham
died in that year, says of him that he was "buried at the
Martyrdom of St. Thomas under the window in the chapel
which he had founded." Godwin and Parker say the same-
" Warham was buried without any great funeral pomp, giving
mourning clothes only to the poore, and laid in a little chappell
built by himself for the place of his buriall upon the north side
of the Martyrdome, and there hath a reasonable faire tombe."
The chapel, however, was never built. Preparations were made
for it, as may be seen in the narrow space between the transept
and the Chapter House that was called " the Slype." The
wall under the transept window was broken through, but an
ominous crack overhead very properly frightened the architect,
and the wall was hurriedly bricked up again. The lofty tomb
that we now see was inserted in the transept wall, and it is
curious that so many writers should call it "a chapel." Outside
the church on the east side there is a little of the panelling with
which the chapel was to have been lined.
CARDINAL POLE.
Reginald Poole descendid from the house of Clarence, and lieth in
the upper part of the cathedrall church on the north side of the east
wyndovve, who dyed the laste yeare of Queene Maryes raygne. Hee was
both Cardinall and Archbishop (Scarlett, fol. 14).
On Cardynall Pools monument who dyed the last year of Queen
Marye, these coats :
1. Clarence. Montague 6.
2. Poole. Monthermer 7.
3. Nevill E. of Sar. Woodstock ) g
4. Beauchamp. Wake J '
5. Warwycke. Clare 10.
Spenser 11. (fol. 12)
It Is not easy to see in the sketch given by Dart of the
decorations of Cardinal Pole's tomb that remained in his time,
where the coat of arms seen by Scarlett can have been. We
cannot refer to the monk of Canterbury that has helped us
hitherto, but another hand has added to his list, after " Thomas
36 The Tombs of t/ie Archbishops
Cranmer truculenter combustus Martii 23, 1556," "Reginald
Pole buried in the Church of Canterbury, in the Crown which
is called Thomas Becket's." Godwin tells us that his body in a
leaden coffin was taken to Canterbury and buried in the chapel
of St. Thomas [on the north side of a litle chappell that is at
the east end of Thomas Becket's chappell — Godivin in the black
letter editions] with this brief notice for an epitaph, Deposituut
Cardinalis PoliP Parker adds that his funeral was celebrated
for three days, and sermons were preached in his praise in Latin
and in English.
It is a mistake on Scarlett's part to say that Cardinal Pole
died in the last year of Mary's reign. He survived her a few
hours, and the funeral panegyrics at Canterbury, as well as the
decorations on the wall above his tomb, were both of them done
to his honour in the first days of Elizabeth. Wriothesley says :
"Thursday xvii November 1558 about sixe in the morning.
Queen Marie died at her manor of St. James by Charing Cross.
. . . Friday, the xviii November Dr. Reynalde Poole Cardinal
and Archbishop of Canterburie died at Lambeth in the morning,
and was ciftervvards buried at Canterburie in Christs Church."
Machyn says the same, except that he puts the Cardinal's death
on "the xix in the morning, between v and vi oclock." He
adds that on " the x day December was brought down from her
chamber Queen Mare," and then, after describing her funeral,
he continues, " the same morning my lorde Cardenall was moved
from Lambeth and cared [carried] towards Canterburie with
grete companie in blake . . . and he was cared in a charett
with [banner] rolles wrought in figne gold and grett banners of
armes, and iiij banners of saints in owlls [oils]."
The tomb now looks miserably poor, and it certainly is to be
wished that Cardinal Pole might have a worthy monumeut. In
that case it will not be like the painted plaster work with which
it was at first adorned, which was in wretched taste. Why
St. Christopher should have been selected as an appropriate
saint, to be painted over the Cardinal's burial-place, is by no
means clear. The style of the drawing, more especially of the
little cherubs, is very Italian, judging by the sketch given
by Dart.
in Canterbury Cathedral. 31
PRIOR CHILLENDKN, or PRIOR EASTRY.
The rest of the burial-places of Archbishops named in our
good monk's list agree with the received descriptions, but one
tomb remains unappropriated, that beside Walter Reynolds'
on the south of the choir, hitherto called Hubert Walter's.
As a working hypothesis, Adam Chillenden may be suggested
for it, who, after being Prior seven years, was elected to the
archbishopric, and died before consecration in the year 1274.
He was practically Henry of Eastry's predecessor, as Thomas
Ringmere, who came between them, left to be a Cistercian
and died in a hermitage. The tomb is of Eastry's time, and
the mitred effigy, that once had a red chasuble with gold lions
passanty as it has no crozier, would very well suit a Prior
who dates before the concession by Urban the Sixth in 1380
of the use of the crozier to the Lords Priors of Christ Church,
Canterbury. Henry of Eastry was himself buried between the
images or pictures of St. Osyth and St. Apollonia. This, it
is to be feared, is ignotum per ignotius, but some day the
whereabouts of these images may be known, and that may
help to determine whether this tomb is Prior Henry of
Eastry's. Meanwhile, we may in imagination well replace an
image of our Lady on the second pier of the nave on the south
side, as Archbishop William Wittlesey was buried between the
second and third pier, not counting the tower piers, and the
Corpus manuscript says that he was " in the nave, before the
image of Blessed Mary." And in like manner we can in our
fancy restore an image of our Divine Saviour to the south-
eastern transept near the place where, as we have seen,
Archbishop Robert Winchelsey was buried. Somner, to iden-
tify the place of his tomb, made uge of an extract from one
of the church records, which speaks of a gift made for "the
light of the throne opposite to the image of our Saviour
opposite to the altars of St. John the Evangelist and St.
Gregory." From this passage it is that we learn the existence
of the image of our Saviour, but the repetition of the word
cotitra^ " over against " or " opposite to," makes it difficult to say
on which side of the transept it stood ; neither is it clear what
the " throne " was that is described as opposite to it, or what
the " light " was burned to honour.
I
14 DAY USE
RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED
LOAN DEPT.
This book is due on the last date stamped below, or
on the date to which renewed.
Renewed books ace subject to immediate recall.
AUcBftrSFy
U_ C.BERKELEY LIBRARIES
CDS11SM47T
868594 *
,4^^ '
1
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11