1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
1351
1352
1353
1354
1355
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
1381
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
1400
1401
1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
1415
1416
1417
1418
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
1425
1426
1427
1428
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433
1434
1435
1436
1437
1438
1439
1440
1441
1442
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
1448
1449
1450
1451
1452
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
1460
1461
1462
1463
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
1469
1470
1471
1472
1473
1474
1475
1476
1477
1478
1479
1480
1481
1482
1483
1484
1485
1486
1487
1488
1489
1490
1491
1492
1493
1494
1495
1496
1497
1498
1499
1500
1501
1502
1503
1504
1505
1506
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
1513
1514
1515
1516
1517
1518
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
1547
1548
1549
1550
1551
1552
1553
1554
1555
1556
1557
1558
1559
1560
1561
1562
1563
1564
1565
1566
1567
1568
1569
1570
1571
1572
1573
1574
1575
1576
1577
1578
1579
1580
1581
1582
1583
1584
1585
1586
1587
1588
1589
1590
1591
1592
1593
1594
1595
1596
1597
1598
1599
1600
1601
1602
1603
1604
1605
1606
1607
1608
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1614
1615
1616
1617
1618
1619
1620
1621
1622
1623
1624
1625
1626
1627
1628
1629
1630
1631
1632
1633
1634
1635
1636
1637
1638
1639
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
1645
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
1706
1707
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
1814
1815
1816
1817
1818
1819
1820
1821
1822
1823
1824
1825
1826
1827
1828
1829
1830
1831
1832
1833
1834
1835
1836
1837
1838
1839
1840
1841
1842
1843
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
1869
1870
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892
1893
1894
1895
1896
1897
1898
1899
1900
1901
1902
1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
2051
2052
2053
2054
2055
2056
2057
2058
2059
2060
2061
2062
2063
2064
2065
2066
2067
2068
2069
2070
2071
2072
2073
2074
2075
2076
2077
2078
2079
2080
2081
2082
2083
2084
2085
2086
2087
2088
2089
2090
2091
2092
2093
2094
2095
2096
2097
2098
2099
2100
2101
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
2108
2109
2110
2111
2112
2113
2114
2115
2116
2117
2118
2119
2120
2121
2122
2123
2124
2125
2126
2127
2128
2129
2130
2131
2132
2133
2134
2135
2136
2137
2138
2139
2140
2141
2142
2143
2144
2145
2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151
2152
2153
2154
2155
2156
2157
2158
2159
2160
2161
2162
2163
2164
2165
2166
2167
2168
2169
2170
2171
2172
2173
2174
2175
2176
2177
2178
2179
2180
2181
2182
2183
2184
2185
2186
2187
2188
2189
2190
2191
2192
2193
2194
2195
2196
2197
2198
2199
2200
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2206
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2218
2219
2220
2221
2222
2223
2224
2225
2226
2227
2228
2229
2230
2231
2232
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
2263
2264
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
2273
2274
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
2280
2281
2282
2283
2284
2285
2286
2287
2288
2289
2290
2291
2292
2293
2294
2295
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
2303
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
2321
2322
2323
2324
2325
2326
2327
2328
2329
2330
2331
2332
2333
2334
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2340
2341
2342
2343
2344
2345
2346
2347
2348
2349
2350
2351
2352
2353
2354
2355
2356
2357
2358
2359
2360
2361
2362
2363
2364
2365
2366
2367
2368
2369
2370
2371
2372
2373
2374
2375
2376
2377
2378
2379
2380
2381
2382
2383
2384
2385
2386
2387
2388
2389
2390
2391
2392
2393
2394
2395
2396
2397
2398
2399
2400
2401
2402
2403
2404
2405
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410
2411
2412
2413
2414
2415
2416
2417
2418
2419
2420
2421
2422
2423
2424
2425
2426
2427
2428
2429
2430
2431
2432
2433
2434
2435
2436
2437
2438
2439
2440
2441
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
2449
2450
2451
2452
2453
2454
2455
2456
2457
2458
2459
2460
2461
2462
2463
2464
2465
2466
2467
2468
2469
2470
2471
2472
2473
2474
2475
2476
2477
2478
2479
2480
2481
2482
2483
2484
2485
2486
2487
2488
2489
2490
2491
2492
2493
2494
2495
2496
2497
2498
2499
2500
2501
2502
2503
2504
2505
2506
2507
2508
2509
2510
2511
2512
2513
2514
2515
2516
2517
2518
2519
2520
2521
2522
2523
2524
2525
2526
2527
2528
2529
2530
2531
2532
2533
2534
2535
2536
2537
2538
2539
2540
2541
2542
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
2550
2551
2552
2553
2554
2555
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
2585
2586
2587
2588
2589
2590
2591
2592
2593
2594
2595
2596
2597
2598
2599
2600
2601
2602
2603
2604
2605
2606
2607
2608
2609
2610
2611
2612
2613
2614
2615
2616
2617
2618
2619
2620
2621
2622
2623
2624
2625
2626
2627
2628
2629
2630
2631
2632
2633
2634
2635
2636
2637
2638
2639
2640
2641
2642
2643
2644
2645
2646
2647
2648
2649
2650
2651
2652
2653
2654
2655
2656
2657
2658
2659
2660
2661
2662
2663
2664
2665
2666
2667
2668
2669
2670
2671
2672
2673
2674
2675
2676
2677
2678
2679
2680
2681
2682
2683
2684
2685
2686
2687
2688
2689
2690
2691
2692
2693
2694
2695
2696
2697
2698
2699
2700
2701
2702
2703
2704
2705
2706
2707
2708
2709
2710
2711
2712
2713
2714
2715
2716
2717
2718
2719
2720
2721
2722
2723
2724
2725
2726
2727
2728
2729
2730
2731
2732
2733
2734
2735
2736
2737
2738
2739
2740
2741
2742
2743
2744
2745
2746
2747
2748
2749
2750
2751
2752
2753
2754
2755
2756
2757
2758
2759
2760
2761
2762
2763
2764
2765
2766
2767
2768
2769
2770
2771
2772
2773
2774
2775
2776
2777
2778
2779
2780
2781
2782
2783
2784
2785
2786
2787
2788
2789
2790
2791
2792
2793
2794
2795
2796
2797
2798
2799
2800
2801
2802
2803
2804
2805
2806
2807
2808
2809
2810
2811
2812
2813
2814
2815
2816
2817
2818
2819
2820
2821
2822
2823
2824
2825
2826
2827
2828
2829
2830
2831
2832
2833
2834
2835
2836
2837
2838
2839
2840
2841
2842
2843
2844
2845
2846
2847
2848
2849
2850
2851
2852
2853
2854
2855
2856
2857
2858
2859
2860
2861
2862
2863
2864
2865
2866
2867
2868
2869
2870
2871
2872
2873
2874
2875
2876
2877
2878
2879
2880
2881
2882
2883
2884
2885
2886
2887
2888
2889
2890
2891
2892
2893
2894
2895
2896
2897
2898
2899
2900
2901
2902
2903
2904
2905
2906
2907
2908
2909
2910
2911
2912
2913
2914
2915
2916
2917
2918
2919
2920
2921
2922
2923
2924
2925
2926
2927
2928
2929
2930
2931
2932
2933
2934
2935
2936
2937
2938
2939
2940
2941
2942
2943
2944
2945
2946
2947
2948
2949
2950
2951
2952
2953
2954
2955
2956
2957
2958
2959
2960
2961
2962
2963
2964
2965
2966
2967
2968
2969
2970
2971
2972
2973
2974
2975
2976
2977
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982
2983
2984
2985
2986
2987
2988
2989
2990
2991
2992
2993
2994
2995
2996
2997
2998
2999
3000
3001
3002
3003
3004
3005
3006
3007
3008
3009
3010
3011
3012
3013
3014
3015
3016
3017
3018
3019
3020
3021
3022
3023
3024
3025
3026
3027
3028
3029
3030
3031
3032
3033
3034
3035
3036
3037
3038
3039
3040
3041
3042
3043
3044
3045
3046
3047
3048
3049
3050
3051
3052
3053
3054
3055
3056
3057
3058
3059
3060
3061
3062
3063
3064
3065
3066
3067
3068
3069
3070
3071
3072
3073
3074
3075
3076
3077
3078
3079
3080
3081
3082
3083
3084
3085
3086
3087
3088
3089
3090
3091
3092
3093
3094
3095
3096
3097
3098
3099
3100
3101
3102
3103
3104
3105
3106
3107
3108
3109
3110
3111
3112
3113
3114
3115
3116
3117
3118
3119
3120
3121
3122
3123
3124
3125
3126
3127
3128
3129
3130
3131
3132
3133
3134
3135
3136
3137
3138
3139
3140
3141
3142
3143
3144
3145
3146
3147
3148
3149
3150
3151
3152
3153
3154
3155
3156
3157
3158
3159
3160
3161
3162
3163
3164
3165
3166
3167
3168
3169
3170
3171
3172
3173
3174
3175
3176
3177
3178
3179
3180
3181
3182
3183
3184
3185
3186
3187
3188
3189
3190
3191
3192
3193
3194
3195
3196
3197
3198
3199
3200
3201
3202
3203
3204
3205
3206
3207
3208
3209
3210
3211
3212
3213
3214
3215
3216
3217
3218
3219
3220
3221
3222
3223
3224
3225
3226
3227
3228
3229
3230
3231
3232
3233
3234
3235
3236
3237
3238
3239
3240
3241
3242
3243
3244
3245
3246
3247
3248
3249
3250
3251
3252
3253
3254
3255
3256
3257
3258
3259
3260
3261
3262
3263
3264
3265
3266
3267
3268
3269
3270
3271
3272
3273
3274
3275
3276
3277
3278
3279
3280
3281
3282
3283
3284
3285
3286
3287
3288
3289
3290
3291
3292
3293
3294
3295
3296
3297
3298
3299
3300
3301
3302
3303
3304
3305
3306
3307
3308
3309
3310
3311
3312
3313
3314
3315
3316
3317
3318
3319
3320
3321
3322
3323
3324
3325
3326
3327
3328
3329
3330
3331
3332
3333
3334
3335
3336
3337
3338
3339
3340
3341
3342
3343
3344
3345
3346
3347
3348
3349
3350
3351
3352
3353
3354
3355
3356
3357
3358
3359
3360
3361
3362
3363
3364
3365
3366
3367
3368
3369
3370
3371
3372
3373
3374
3375
3376
3377
3378
3379
3380
3381
3382
3383
3384
3385
3386
3387
3388
3389
3390
3391
3392
3393
3394
3395
3396
3397
3398
3399
3400
3401
3402
3403
3404
3405
3406
3407
3408
3409
3410
3411
3412
3413
3414
3415
3416
3417
3418
3419
3420
3421
3422
3423
3424
3425
3426
3427
3428
3429
3430
3431
3432
3433
3434
3435
3436
3437
3438
3439
3440
3441
3442
3443
3444
3445
3446
3447
3448
3449
3450
3451
3452
3453
3454
3455
3456
3457
3458
3459
3460
3461
3462
3463
3464
3465
3466
3467
3468
3469
3470
3471
3472
3473
3474
3475
3476
3477
3478
3479
3480
3481
3482
3483
3484
3485
3486
3487
3488
3489
3490
3491
3492
3493
3494
3495
3496
3497
3498
3499
3500
3501
3502
3503
3504
3505
3506
3507
3508
3509
3510
3511
3512
3513
3514
3515
3516
3517
3518
3519
3520
3521
3522
3523
3524
3525
3526
3527
3528
3529
3530
3531
3532
3533
3534
3535
3536
3537
3538
3539
3540
3541
3542
3543
3544
3545
3546
3547
3548
3549
3550
3551
3552
3553
3554
3555
3556
3557
3558
3559
3560
3561
3562
3563
3564
3565
3566
3567
3568
3569
3570
3571
3572
3573
3574
3575
3576
3577
3578
3579
3580
3581
3582
3583
3584
3585
3586
3587
3588
3589
3590
3591
3592
3593
3594
3595
3596
3597
3598
3599
3600
3601
3602
3603
3604
3605
3606
3607
3608
3609
3610
3611
3612
3613
3614
3615
3616
3617
3618
3619
3620
3621
3622
3623
3624
3625
3626
3627
3628
3629
3630
3631
3632
3633
3634
3635
3636
3637
3638
3639
3640
3641
3642
3643
3644
3645
3646
3647
3648
3649
3650
3651
3652
3653
3654
3655
3656
3657
3658
3659
3660
3661
3662
3663
3664
3665
3666
3667
3668
3669
3670
3671
3672
3673
3674
3675
3676
3677
3678
3679
3680
3681
3682
3683
3684
3685
3686
3687
3688
3689
3690
3691
3692
3693
3694
3695
3696
3697
3698
3699
3700
3701
3702
3703
3704
3705
3706
3707
3708
3709
3710
3711
3712
3713
3714
3715
3716
3717
3718
3719
3720
3721
3722
3723
3724
3725
3726
3727
3728
3729
3730
3731
3732
3733
3734
3735
3736
3737
3738
3739
3740
3741
3742
3743
3744
3745
3746
3747
3748
3749
3750
3751
3752
3753
3754
3755
3756
3757
3758
3759
3760
3761
3762
3763
3764
3765
3766
3767
3768
3769
3770
3771
3772
3773
3774
3775
3776
3777
3778
3779
3780
3781
3782
3783
3784
3785
3786
3787
3788
3789
3790
3791
3792
3793
3794
3795
3796
3797
3798
3799
3800
3801
3802
3803
3804
3805
3806
3807
3808
3809
3810
3811
3812
3813
3814
3815
3816
3817
3818
3819
3820
3821
3822
3823
3824
3825
3826
3827
3828
3829
3830
3831
3832
3833
3834
3835
3836
3837
3838
3839
3840
3841
3842
3843
3844
3845
3846
3847
3848
|
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" />
<title>Historical Sketches of Old Charing. The Hospital and Chapel of Saint Mary Roncevall. Eleanor of Castile, Queen of England, and the monuments erected in her memory, by James Galloway—A Project Gutenberg eBook</title>
<link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
<style type="text/css">
body { margin-left: 8%; margin-right: 10%; }
h1 { text-align: center; font-weight: normal; font-size: 1.4em; }
h2 { text-align: center; font-weight: normal; font-size: 1.2em; }
h3 { text-align: center; font-weight: normal; font-size: 1.2em; }
.pageno { right: 1%; font-size: x-small; background-color: inherit; color: silver;
text-indent: 0em; text-align: right; position: absolute;
border: thin solid silver; padding: .1em .2em; font-style: normal;
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; }
p { text-indent: 0; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; text-align: justify; }
sup { vertical-align: top; font-size: 0.6em; }
.fss { font-size: 75%; }
.sc { font-variant: small-caps; }
.large { font-size: large; }
.xlarge { font-size: x-large; }
.small { font-size: small; }
.xsmall { font-size: x-small; }
.lg-container-b { text-align: center; }
@media handheld { .lg-container-b { clear: both; } }
.linegroup { display: inline-block; text-align: left; }
@media handheld { .linegroup { display: block; margin-left: 1.5em; } }
.linegroup .group { margin: 1em auto; }
.linegroup .line { text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em; }
div.linegroup > :first-child { margin-top: 0; }
.linegroup .in2 { padding-left: 4.0em; }
ul.ul_1 {padding-left: 0; margin-left: 2.78%; margin-top: .5em;
margin-bottom: .5em; list-style-type: disc; }
ul.ul_2 {padding-left: 0; margin-left: 6.94%; margin-top: .5em;
margin-bottom: .5em; list-style-type: circle; }
div.footnote {margin-left: 2.5em; }
div.footnote > :first-child { margin-top: 1em; }
div.footnote .label { display: inline-block; width: 0em; text-indent: -2.5em;
text-align: right; }
div.pbb { page-break-before: always; }
hr.pb { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-bottom: 1em; }
@media handheld { hr.pb { display: none; } }
.sidenote, .sni { text-indent: 0; text-align: left; width: 9em; min-width: 9em;
max-width: 9em; padding-bottom: .1em; padding-top: .1em;
padding-left: .3em; padding-right: .3em; margin-right: 3.5em; float: left;
clear: left; margin-top: 0em; margin-bottom: 0em; font-size: small;
color: black; background-color: #eeeeee; border: thin dotted gray;
font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-variant: normal;
letter-spacing: 0em; text-decoration: none; }
@media handheld { .sidenote, .sni { float: left; clear: none; font-weight: bold;
} }
.sni { text-indent: -.2em; }
.hidev { visibility: hidden; }
.chapter { clear: both; page-break-before: always; }
.figcenter { clear: both; max-width: 100%; margin: 2em auto; text-align: center; }
div.figcenter p { text-align: center; text-indent: 0; }
.figcenter img { max-width: 100%; height: auto; }
.id001 { width:800px; }
.id002 { width:1000px; }
.id003 { width:300px; }
@media handheld { .id001 { margin-left:0%; width:100%; } }
@media handheld { .id002 { margin-left:0%; width:100%; } }
@media handheld { .id003 { margin-left:31%; width:37%; } }
.ic002 { width:100%; }
.ic004 { width:100%; }
div.ic004 p { text-align:center; }
.ig001 { width:100%; }
.nf-center { text-align: center; }
.nf-center-c0 { text-align: left; margin: 0.5em 0; }
.c000 { margin-top: 1em; }
.c001 { margin-top: 4em; }
.c002 { page-break-before: always; margin-top: 2em; }
.c003 { margin-top: 3em; }
.c004 { font-size: 2.25em; }
.c005 { font-size: 2.00em; }
.c006 { margin-top: 2em; }
.c007 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em;
margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 45%; width: 10%; margin-right: 45%; }
.c008 { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c009 { text-indent: 5.56%; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c010 { font-size: 1.75em; }
.c011 { page-break-before:auto; margin-top: 2em; }
.c012 { font-size: 1.45em; }
.c013 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em;
margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 45%; width: 10%; margin-right: 45%;
margin-top: 2em; }
.c014 { text-indent: 27.78%; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c015 { margin-top: 2em; text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c016 { text-decoration: none; }
.c017 { margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c018 { margin-top: 1em; text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c019 { margin-left: 5.56%; margin-right: 5.56%; margin-top: 1em; font-size: 85%;
text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c020 { text-align: right; }
.c021 { margin-left: 34.72%; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c022 { margin-left: 20.83%; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c023 { margin-left: 20.83%; text-indent: 1em; margin-top: 0.5em;
margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c024 { margin-left: 6.94%; text-indent: -6.94%; margin-top: 0.5em;
margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c025 { page-break-before:auto; margin-top: 4em; }
.c026 { margin-left: 1.39%; font-size: 85%; }
.c027 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em;
margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 25%; width: 50%; margin-right: 25%;
margin-top: 2em; }
.c028 { margin-left: 5.56%; margin-right: 5.56%; font-size: 85%; text-indent: 1em;
margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
body {width:80%; margin:auto; }
h1 {font-size: 1.75em; text-align: center; }
h2 {font-size: 1.40em; text-align: center; }
h3 {font-size: 1.30em; text-align: center; }
body {font-size: 1.20em; text-align: left; }
.sidenote {width: 4em; min-width: 4em; max-width: 9em; margin-right: 1.5em; }
.tnbox {background-color:#E3E4FA;border:1px solid silver;padding: 0.5em;
margin:2em 10% 0 10%; }
.fn {font-size: 0.75em; line-height: 125%; }
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 69321 ***</div>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/cover.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c000' />
</div>
<div class='figcenter id002'>
<img src='images/frontis.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 1.</span><br />Charing Cross and the Chapel of St. Mary Roncevall in<br />the early part of the sixteenth century. (After Van den Wyngaerde.)</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c001' />
</div>
<div>
<h1 class='c002'>HISTORICAL SKETCHES OF OLD CHARING</h1>
</div>
<div class='nf-center-c0'>
<div class='nf-center c000'>
<div class='c003'><span class='c004'>The Hospital and Chapel of Saint</span></div>
<div><span class='c004'>Mary Roncevall</span></div>
<div class='c001'><span class='c004'>Eleanor of Castile, Queen of England</span></div>
<div class='c000'><span class='large'>AND THE</span></div>
<div class='c000'><span class='c005'>Monuments Erected in Her Memory</span></div>
<div class='c003'>BY</div>
<div class='c000'><span class='xlarge'>JAMES GALLOWAY,</span></div>
<div class='c000'><span class='large'>A.M., M.D.</span></div>
<div class='c000'><i>Senior Physician, and a Vice-President, Charing Cross Hospital</i>.</div>
<div class='c003'><span class='small'>LONDON</span></div>
<div><span class='xlarge'>JOHN BALE, SONS & DANIELSSON, <span class='sc'>Ltd.</span></span></div>
<div><span class='small'>OXFORD HOUSE</span></div>
<div>83-91, GREAT TITCHFIELD STREET, OXFORD STREET, W.</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c006' />
</div>
<div class='nf-center-c0'>
<div class='nf-center c001'>
<div>PREFACE.</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr class='c007' />
<p class='c008'>These Studies in the history of Old London were written at
the request of Students of Charing Cross Hospital, and were first
published in their Gazette. The rough outlines, marks of which
may be easily discerned, were formed by the notes for Lectures
delivered to the Students and Nursing Staff of the Hospital on
various occasions. It is hoped that in the present form these
Studies may continue to be of interest to friends of Charing Cross
Hospital, and perhaps also to the large and increasing number of
Students of the history of London.</p>
<p class='c008'>London,</p>
<p class='c009'>Easter, 1914.</p>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c001' />
</div>
<div class='nf-center-c0'>
<div class='nf-center c001'>
<div><span class='c010'>THE HOSPITAL AND CHAPEL OF</span></div>
<div><span class='c010'>SAINT MARY RONCEVALL</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c001' />
</div>
<div class='chapter'>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_7'>7</span>
<h2 class='c011'>THE HOSPITAL AND CHAPEL OF<br /> <br /><span class='c012'>SAINT MARY RONCEVALL</span><br /> <br />AT CHARING CROSS.</h2>
</div>
<hr class='c013' />
<div class='lg-container-b c006'>
<div class='linegroup'>
<div class='group'>
<div class='line'>“En Rencesvals si est Carles entrez;</div>
<div class='line'>* * *</div>
<div class='line'>Rollanz remeint pur les altres guarder.</div>
<div class='line'>* * *</div>
<div class='line'>Halt sunt li pui e tenebrus e grant,</div>
<div class='line'>Li val parfunt e les ewes curranz.</div>
<div class='line'>* * *</div>
<div class='line'>Li gentilz quens, qu’il fut morz cunquerant.”</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c014'>“La Chanson de Roland,” édition, Léon Gautier.</p>
<p class='c015'><span class='sc'>The</span> fact that the conventual Hospital of St. Mary Roncevall was
founded at the village of Charing in the time of Henry III, and that
it continued to exist till the dissolution of the religious houses by
Henry VIII, is well known to students of the history of London; but,
so far as the writer is aware, no definite attempt had been made to
collect the remaining records of this interesting medical foundation
before 1907, when the story of the Convent and its Hospital was
published privately.<a id='r1' /><a href='#f1' class='c016'><sup>[1]</sup></a> Nevertheless, the influence of the Convent and
the Hospital which it established was considerable during the three
centuries of their existence in England. The name which the Convent
in London received from the Mother House served to revive the
memories of perilous journeys and of timely succour in the minds of
many who had travelled abroad in France and Spain engaged either
in warlike or peaceful affairs, the name of Roncevall in many forms
came to be used as a family designation in various parts of England;<a id='r2' /><a href='#f2' class='c016'><sup>[2]</sup></a>
and Chaucer refers to the existence of the Convent in a way that shows
that the reference required no explanation to his readers. After the
dissolution of the alien priories the fraternity owed its continued
existence to the recognition of the charitable assistance it rendered
to “the poor people flocking to the Hospital.”</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f1'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r1'>1</a>. </span>Galloway, James, “The Story of Saint Mary Roncevall,”
private publication; and <i>Charing Cross Hosp. Gaz.</i>, 1907, ix, p.
43. Cf. references by Dugdale, “Monasticon Anglicanum,” ed. 1830;
Newcourt, “Repertorium Ecclesiasticum Parochiale Londinense,” 1708;
Tanner, “Notitia Monastica,” 1744; also by Stow and later writers on
London.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f2'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r2'>2</a>. </span>The records of the painful dispute between the Abbot of
Rewley and John Ronceval and his associates, John, Thomas, and Walter
Rounceval may be yet read with interest.—Calend. Pat. Rolls. 16 Ed. II
and 14 Ed. III. (1323-41.)</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_8'>8</span>This attempt to fill up a gap in the history of London hospitals
may be of some service to the students of the history of medicine, and
of interest to the larger number who are unwilling to forget the stories
of Old London.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Roncesvalles.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>There are few places so renowned in the early literature of the
Romance languages as the pass through the Western Pyrenees, at
the southern extremity of which lies the village of Roncesvalles. The
Song of Roland handed down the memories of Roncesvalles from the
early Middle Ages; but this famous poem (dating in its present form
from the latter part of the eleventh century) must be regarded only
as the final and successful effort to collect the traditions which form
the foundations of French and Spanish history. The traditions find
their earliest record in the legends and “chansons de geste,” which,
in the first instance, served to commemorate the successful rising
of the people of Spain to expel an invader, Charlemagne, the
Emperor of the North. The rearguard of his retreating host, consisting
chiefly of Frankish subjects of the Emperor under the leadership
of the Count Roland, Captain-General of the Breton March, the
Emperor’s nephew, was overwhelmed and annihilated, while traversing
the Pass on their retreat from Spain in the year 778. The ancient
history of Eginhard, telling of the Spaniards, says very suggestively
“usque ad unum omnes interficiunt ac ... summa cum celeritate in
diversa disperguntur.” Even “li gentilz quens” did not escape the
massacre. The Chanson de Roland gives the French version of this
tradition, which was accepted by the Normans in England; the Spanish
legend of the hero Bernardo del Carpio gives, as it is to be expected,
a very different account of the overthrow of the Emperor.</p>
<p class='c008'>In the course of the succeeding centuries the Pass of Roncesvalles
occupies on more than one occasion a prominent place in British
history. One of the most picturesque passages in Froissart tells how
the army of Edward the Black Prince traversed the Pass in the ill-omened
invasion of Spain that led to his fatal illness. His remarkable
victory at Navarrete scarcely relieves the gloomy record of this adventure.
Little more than one hundred years have elapsed since Roncesvalles
and the neighbouring defiles once more saw the advance of
war-worn British soldiery. In the defence of these passes against
the advance of the French under Soult, so nearly successful in overwhelming
Wellington’s right flank, and in the subsequent pursuit of
<span class='pageno' id='Page_9'>9</span>the retreating French armies, some of the most remarkable of the feats
of arms which distinguished the Peninsular War took place. British
military history contains few more stirring episodes than the combats
between the French and the allied troops in the Passes of Maya and
Roncesvalles.</p>
<div class='figcenter id002'>
<img src='images/i009.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 2.</span><br /><span class='xsmall'><i>Stanfords Geog<sup>.</sup> Estab<sup>.</sup> London.</i></span><br />A chart of the Western Pyrenees, showing the roads through the passes and the position of Roncesvalles and Ibañeta.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The memories of Roncesvalles, therefore, are in no danger of being
forgotten, but it has passed from knowledge that for a period of more
than three hundred years the name of Roncesvalles was more familiar
to the citizens of Westminster and London than to the dwellers
in Pamplona and Bayonne. How it came about that an important
<span class='pageno' id='Page_10'>10</span>religious house dedicated to Our Lady of Roncesvalles should have been
established at Charing will best be understood if we consider the
nature of the activities of the ancient Monastery in the Pass of
Roncesvalles, the numbers of those on whom it conferred benefits, and
the character of its benefactors in England.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Convent of St. Mary Roncesvalles in Navarre.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>From very early Christian times a religious house, no doubt very
small in its beginnings, was situated near the top of the pass through
which runs the ancient road over the Pyrenees leading from Pamplona
in Navarre, through the mountains by St. Jean Pied-de-Port, to
Bayonne and Bordeaux. The religious community at this place
received its most important support from Charlemagne himself, when
he established a religious house intended to be a memorial of Roland
and his comrades in arms. The original Convent of Charlemagne’s
foundation was situated close to the village of Ibañeta, near the summit
of the Pass and the site of the great battle. Of this house only insignificant
and deserted ruins remain. After a destructive raid by the
Moors under Abderramen, Caliph of Cordova, in 921, the community
removed to the present site of the Monastery in the village of Roncesvalles,
two or three kilometres farther south. The removal of the
Convent to this site is said to have been determined by various
miraculous signs, among others by the discovery of an image of the
Holy Virgin, and it was clearly to the advantage of the community
that its permanent settlement should be in the comparatively sheltered
southern approaches of the Pass rather than on the exposed summit.</p>
<p class='c008'>The Order of Roncesvalles thus became established on a firmer
basis, and at first had distinct military as well as religious purposes.
The members of the community consisted of knights and companions,
as well as the brothers and sisters, who all bore the badge of the Order.
The duties which they had to fulfil were military, for the Knights of
Roncesvalles were in frequent conflict with the Moors, and religious,
for not only did the brethren serve their Church, but one of the earliest
and most important duties of the community was to establish a hospital
in the Pass for wayfarers in this wild region.</p>
<p class='c008'>In the course of time the members of this military-religious community
received the Augustinian Rule, but they retained much of their
independence, the memories of their original order, and especially held
to the traditions of hospitality and charitable succour to pilgrims and
<span class='pageno' id='Page_11'>11</span>to those in distress. The Convent and its Hospital gradually acquired
wide renown on account of the good works carried on by the Canons.
Their house was on the main road between France and Spain.
The military expeditions so frequently traversing the frontiers
marched along the highway passing its doors, pilgrims visiting the
shrine of St. James at Compostella must have halted there on their
way to and from the south, and the road through the Pass was the
chief highway for peaceful travellers of every kind. The community,
therefore, increased in importance and in wealth by gifts from princes,
nobles, knights, and the common folk, and came to possess property
not only in Spain, but also in Portugal, Italy and in France, and, as
the records show, in England and Wales, in Ireland, and in Scotland.
It is stated that at the height of its prosperity the Convent distributed
annually from 25,000 to 30,000 rations, each consisting of a loaf of
16 oz., half a pint of wine, with sufficient soup and meat, or fish on
days of fast. Those who were infirm had chicken broth and mutton.
The Hospital had a staff consisting of the physicians, with whom were
associated surgeons and an apothecary, and one of the distinguishing
features of the Order at a very early period was that it included sisters.
In the case of patients dying while in hospital, free interment was given
after the celebration of masses in due form. It is expressly stated that
the daughter house in England, with its possessions in that country, in
Ireland, and in Scotland, remitted annually the sum of 4,000 ducats
for the support of the Mother House at Roncesvalles.<a id='r3' /><a href='#f3' class='c016'><sup>[3]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f3'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r3'>3</a>. </span>Cf. Reseña histórica de la Real Casa de nuestra Señora de
Roncesvalles; por D. Hilario Sarasa, Pamplona, 1878; a review was
published by Wentworth Webster in the “Academy,” 1879, xvi, p. 135-6.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the community of
Roncesvalles fell on evil days. The march of events deprived them of
their property abroad, while laxity in the observance of their Rule
and the continually disturbed state of the Franco-Spanish frontier
brought about the loss of the greater part of their accumulated possessions
and wealth. Unfortunately the ancient records of the Monastery
have nearly all been destroyed; but there remains in the library an
unpublished manuscript giving the history of the Order and the Convent,
written by Don Juan Huarte, about the middle of the seventeenth
century, which incorporates information received from a certain Don
Francisco Olastro<a id='r4' /><a href='#f4' class='c016'><sup>[4]</sup></a> (who is stated to have been an ambassador from
England in Madrid) respecting the history of their daughter house in
London. But even at the time when this document was written, many
<span class='pageno' id='Page_12'>12</span>statements it contains appear to have acquired the characteristics of
tradition and can be accepted only after careful collation and criticism.
We have, therefore, to depend almost entirely on the English records
for the history of the House of Roncesvalles in London.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f4'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r4'>4</a>. </span>? Francis Oliver.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Convent of Saint Mary Roncevall at Charing.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>To understand how it was possible that a religious house in the
Pyrenees could hold possessions scattered throughout so many different
lands, it must be clearly borne in mind that in the Middle Ages the
rule exercised by the Church took very little cognizance of State limits.
The ecclesiastical power was much stronger than the national influences
of the time, and the Church drew its revenues from all Christian
countries, quite irrespective of political boundaries. At the time when
the House of Roncesvalles at Charing was founded, the overlordship
of the Pope had been felt in England and in France in a very real
manner. In addition to this ecclesiastical bond, the political relationships
between England, France and Northern Spain were of the most
intimate character, so that the all-pervading power of the Church
could be exercised with the greater ease in these countries. During the
period of the Norman, and even more so during the Angevin dynasty,
the English barons experienced the greatest difficulty in detaching
themselves from the influences exerted on them by their foreign
relationships, even if they had the desire to do so. In many cases they
seem to have frankly regarded their insular possessions as sources
of revenue and power to be made use of in order to promote their
Continental interests. In this respect they followed the example
set in such unmistakable fashion by kings such as Richard and John.
The Church acted in the same manner, and many foreign convents
were able, by their powerful influence, to obtain possession of, and
to exploit, the rich lands of England for their own support. It
was not until the close of the reign of John and during the reign
of Henry III that the separate destinies of England and France
became apparent to the more sagacious of the English statesmen
of that period. It is very instructive, therefore, to note as evidence
of the complicated and distracting political and social influences still
felt by the English magnates, that the noble family which perhaps most
of all by its example and advice sought to uphold the political independence
of England as apart from France, was nevertheless impelled
to become one of the great benefactors of a foreign religious house.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i013.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 3.</span> <span class='sc'>Fig. 4.</span><br />Figs. 3 and 4.—Front and profile views of the effigy in the Temple<br />Church of William Marshall, sen., Earl of Pembroke (<i>ob.</i> 1219).</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_13'>13</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke (1219-31), Founder of St. Mary Roncevall.</span></h3>
</div>
<p class='c018'>The House of Roncesvalles appears to have owed most of its
property in England and in Ireland to the liberality of William
Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, the eldest son of the great William
Marshall—<i>Rector regis et regni</i>—the Protector of the King and his
kingdom after the death of John. The elder Marshall stands out in
conspicuous fashion as the most steadfast of all the advisers of the
king during the dark period coinciding with the reigns of Richard I
and John. His early years were passed in France, acquiring skill in
the martial exercises commonly practised by the young nobles of the
day, and his courage and proficiency in arms were such that he had
early acquired the reputation of being one of the most redoubtable
knights in Christendom. If no other evidence remained of his prowess,
the historic passage of arms against Richard Cœur de Lion while still
Count of Poitiers will be sufficient proof.<a id='r5' /><a href='#f5' class='c016'><sup>[5]</sup></a> On this occasion he overthrew
Richard and held him at his mercy, preventing the mad attack
on his father, and probably saved the Prince from the fate of being
a parricide. In addition to his skill in the use of arms, he gradually
built up for himself a reputation for prudence, sagacity and
loyalty, so that while still a young man he was entrusted with the
guardianship of the young Henry, son of Henry II, and in the
succeeding reigns occupied the most prominent positions under the
English Crown, trusted by the barons and even by John. The
testimony of the French King Philip Augustus, when informed of the
death of William Marshall, as to his reputation for loyalty and honour
<span class='pageno' id='Page_14'>14</span>remains on record: “Et, en vérité le Maréchal fut l’homme le plus
loyal que j’aie jamais connu.”<a id='r6' /><a href='#f6' class='c016'><sup>[6]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f5'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r5'>5</a>. </span>“Al conte Richard ki veneit.<br />
E quant li quens le vit venir<br />
Si s’escria par grant haïr:<br />
‘Par les gambes Dieu! Maréchal<br />
Ne m’ociez; ce sereit mal.<br />
Ge sui toz desarmes issi.’<br />
Et li Maréchal respondi:<br />
‘Nenil! diables vos ocie!<br />
Cor jo ne vos ocirai mie.’”<br /></p>
<p class='c017'> —“L’Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal,” 8836-8844; publié pour la Société de l’Histoire de France par Paul Meyer.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f6'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r6'>6</a>. </span>“Dist li reis ‘mes li Maréchal
Fu, al mien dit, li plus leials,
Veir, que jeo unques coneusse
En nul liu ou je unques fusse.”</p>
<p class='c017'>—“L’Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal,” 19149-19152.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>During the many years of William Marshall’s residence abroad
he travelled widely throughout France and no doubt in Northern
Spain. It is well known that he went on pilgrimage to the Holy
Sepulchre in fulfilment of a promise given to the young Henry on his
deathbed. Marshall must have been very familiar with the reputation
of the Monastery at Roncesvalles. There can be little doubt that he
had passed it on his journeyings; the military-religious character of
its Rule would have appealed to him, and he may even have rested in
the House of the Convent. His piety is evidenced by the fact that he
became closely associated with the Order of the Knights Templars,
was one of their great benefactors in England, and at his death received
sepulture in their church, then newly built in London.</p>
<p class='c008'>The elder Marshall died in the year 1219, and was succeeded by
his eldest son, also called William, who then became possessed of one
of the most extensive heritages in England, for the English and
Welsh lands of the Clares, Earls of Pembroke, and in addition their
great Irish inheritance in Leinster, had come into the possession of
the Marshall family.</p>
<p class='c008'>What we know of the son shows him to have been a man of
much the same type as his father—probably not so rugged, but with
the same steadfast ideals of loyal conduct. It is evident that his
character was as strongly tinctured with religious feeling as was that
of his father. He also was an Associate of the Order of the Knights
Templars, and was one of their principal supporters after their
removal to the “New Temple,” where the “Temple” Church still
stands. His admiration for his father is clearly shown by the priceless
biography of the elder William which we still possess. This
poem is known as “L’Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal” and is
evidently the work of a professional writer of the period, but it
was composed under the direction of the son of the great Marshall
with the assistance of Jean d’Erleé,<a id='r7' /><a href='#f7' class='c016'><sup>[7]</sup></a> his father’s old companion and
faithful squire.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f7'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r7'>7</a>. </span>Erlée; Earley (Erleia, Erlegh, &c.), near Reading.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i014.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Figs.</span> 5, 6, and 7.—Front and profile views of the effigy in the<br />Temple Church of William Marshall, jun., Earl of Pembroke (<i>ob.</i> 1231).</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_15'>15</span>During the lifetime of William Marshall and his son, and for long
before and after, the high road through the Pass of Roncesvalles
was much frequented. It was the main line of communication by
land between France and Spain on the western frontier, and was
used both by peaceful travellers and by the numerous military
expeditions passing from one country to the other. These expeditions
resulted not only from the constant warfare of the border but
were also organized by Crusaders on their way to help the Spaniard
against the Moor, frequently with the purpose of travelling farther to
the Holy Land. At this time also the relationships formed by
Henry II and his sons with the Courts of the new kingdoms in
the north of Spain, which were beginning to arise as the tide of
Moorish invasion receded, were of the most intimate character. It will
be remembered that Richard, when King of England, married Berengaria,
daughter of Sancho VI of Navarre, after a very troublesome
wooing, and that the younger Sancho took the part of Richard while
the latter was on crusade against their common enemies in the South
of France. The relationship between the Courts of Aragon and Castile
and the Angevin Kings was no less intimate. William Marshall and
his eldest son were in the closest association with the Royal House.
They both travelled far and wide over France and Northern Spain,
so that the Angevin dominions in Aquitaine and the neighbouring
kingdom of Navarre must at one time have been as well known to
the Marshall family as their home in England.</p>
<p class='c008'>Another reason which brought many travellers along the road
through Roncesvalles was the attraction of the Shrine of St. James
at Compostella. The pilgrimage to Compostella was undertaken by
knights and their squires as the result of vows made on the field
of battle, and was famed for its efficacy among all engaged in military
affairs. But the pilgrimage even to armed bands was a dangerous one
on account of the disturbed state of the frontier. An interesting
example of this is presented in the relationships between Richard
and his neighbour the Count of Toulouse. The ostensible cause for
Richard’s warfare against the Count of Toulouse was the inveterate
inclination of the latter to acts of brigandage. When war was declared
the Count of Toulouse had actually captured and ill-treated two English
knights named Robert le Poer and Ralph Fraser, on their return
from a pilgrimage to Compostella. The reputation of the Hospital
of St. Mary in the Pass of Roncesvalles and of the Convent which
supported the Hospital was known to every traveller—peaceful or
<span class='pageno' id='Page_16'>16</span>warlike—in Western Europe, and would certainly have appealed to
the benevolence of such a man as the younger William Marshall.
The probability is that both father and son had stronger motives
for giving alms to the Community—the result of benefits received
from the Convent and Hospital during their journeys between France
and Spain.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Coming of the Brethren to England (1229) and the Foundation of the Convent at Charing</span>.</h3>
<p class='c018'>The first knowledge we have of the presence in England of members
of the Community of Roncesvalles is obtained from the letters of protection
given to certain brethren by Henry III, in the year 1229.
These letters were of the usual complete character, and it is clear that
the intention of the deputation from Roncesvalles was to seek alms in
England for the support of their House in the remote valley in the
Pyrenees. This purpose was definitely encouraged by a special clause
in the letters of protection.</p>
<p class='c008'>The brethren seem to have been taken under the patronage of the
younger William Marshall from the beginning. They may even have
come to England on his invitation, for we find that he soon commenced
to make arrangements to give them revenues and an establishment in
this country. Very unfortunately for the Convent, the Earl died in the
year 1231, soon after his return to England from Henry’s disastrous
campaign in Poitou and Brittany, where he had held the chief command.
But the record of his great gift remains, for on August 11, 1232, Henry
confirmed at Wenlock “the grant to Saint Mary and the Hospital at
Roncevaux (<i>Roscida Vallis</i>) of the gift which William Marshall,
sometime Earl of Pembroke, made to them of all his houses at Cherring,
and the houses and curtilages adjoining them formerly belonging to
William Briwere, and of 100<i>s.</i> at Suthanton payable from the
houses of the said Earl there, of 13<i>l.</i> of land in Netherwent in
the moor of Magor, and of a carucate of land in Assandon, which he
bought from Robert de Rochford.”</p>
<p class='c008'>It was thus in consequence of the munificence of William Marshall
the younger that the brethren of Roncesvalles obtained the land on
the banks of the Thames at Charing where they subsequently built
their conventual dwelling, their Hospital for the sick, and the Chapel
by the riverside, which were to remain an important feature of London
for over three hundred years.</p>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_17'>17</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Saint Mary Roncevall to the Year 1348.</span></h3>
</div>
<p class='c018'>The records of this alien settlement for many years consist mainly
of statements of the gifts received from various important persons.
The community seems to have flourished, and their work, both in
London and in the Pyrenees, continued to deserve the sympathy and
support of their pious benefactors. There is evidence that they possessed
property in Norwich, Canterbury, Oxford, Pevensey, Southampton, and
elsewhere, and that they received certain revenues from Ireland and from
Scotland. It is easy to understand that their Irish revenues may have
been considerable on account of the great estates possessed by the Marshall
family in Leinster. It is clear also that the Convent had the advantage
of royal favour and patronage, for the English records contain several
confirmations of valuable gifts from both Henry III and Edward I,
derived from royal property situated in the South of France, to the mother
house in the Pyrenees. One of the most interesting of these gifts is the
rent to be derived for the benefit of the Convent from the King’s lands
in the town of Myramand, previously granted to Eleanor, the Queen
Mother. This grant is specially mentioned in the same document as
another endowment derived from the same source to be paid to the
Abbey of Fontevraud. This benefaction to the House of Roncesvalles
gives the measure of respect in which it was held, for an English king
who placed the house of Roncesvalles in the same category as the Abbey
of Fontevraud as worthy of support must have felt the claims of the
Convent in the Pyrenees in the strongest possible way. Edward’s
Angevin ancestors had been buried in the Church of Fontevraud for
generations, and there was no ecclesiastical foundation possessing
a greater claim on the munificence of the Angevin family than this
Abbey.</p>
<p class='c008'>The little that is known of the domestic progress of the House at
Charing, in addition to such general indications as are given of its
financial condition, concerns the appointment of certain officials. In
the year 1278, and again in 1280, a certain Henry, son of William
of Smalebrook, was appointed as his attorney for two years on each
occasion by the Prior of the Hospital of Roncesvalles. The inference
to be derived from this is that the weakness inherent in all the alien
houses had already begun to show itself in the community at Charing.
The management of the estates in England was entrusted to agents in
this country, with the consequence that maladministration of their
<span class='pageno' id='Page_18'>18</span>affairs was very apt to take place, and, as a result, opportunities
frequently arose for the interference of neighbouring magnates or of
the King himself with the affairs of the alien religious houses.</p>
<p class='c008'>Complications of this nature must have taken place about this time
at the House at Charing. In the year 1283 a certain Brother Lupus
appears upon the scene for the first time. His position in England
seems to have been that of envoy coming from the Pope, but in the same
record he is described as a priest, envoy and preceptor of the Houses in
England and Ireland of the Prior and Convent of the Hospital of St.
Mary Roncesvalles, and he no doubt had instructions to supervise the
management of their estates. The arrival of Brother Lupus, “streight
comen fro the court of Rome,” with indulgences for the remission of
sins, is an interesting proof that even so early as the year 1283 the
sale of indulgences was one of the special functions of the brethren of
Roncesvalles, and was no doubt a source of considerable income to the
Priory<a id='r8' /><a href='#f8' class='c016'><sup>[8]</sup></a>. Chaucer, writing a hundred years later, alludes, in his characteristic
ironical manner, to this side of the activities of the Canons of
Roncesvalles;<a id='r9' /><a href='#f9' class='c016'><sup>[9]</sup></a> and even so late as the year 1432, when the House in
London had come under the influence of the English clergy, a special
effort was made to preserve this source of profit.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f8'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r8'>8</a>. </span>An instructive example is afforded by the exploits of Ralph de
“Runcevill,” who is stigmatized as a vagabond monk, but who was
nevertheless strong enough to retain possession of the Priory of
Goldcliff in the Marches of Wales (near Newport, Monmouthshire) in
spite of the efforts of his superior, the Abbot of the very important
Convent of Bec-Hellouin, in Normandy, of which the House at Goldcliff
was a “Cell,” “Calend. Pat. Rolls,” 12-14, Ed. II, (1319-1321).</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f9'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r9'>9</a>. </span>“A Somner was ther with us in that place,<br />
That had a fyr-reed cherubinnes face.”<br />
* * * *<br />
“With him ther rood a gentil Pardoner<br />
Of Rouncival, his freend and his compeer,<br />
That streight was comen fro the court of Rome.<br />
Ful loude he song ‘Com hider, love, to me.’<br />
This somnour bar to him a stiff burdoun,<br />
Was never trompe of half so greet a soun.”<br /><br />
—The Prologue to the “Canterbury Tales” (Dr. Skeat’s edition).</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c018'>The year 1290 must have been notable in the annals of the Hospital,
for in that year died Eleanor of Castile, the wife of Edward I, at Harby,
near Lincoln, and the King in pious memory built a sculptured cross
at every place where the body of his consort rested during the funeral
procession to Westminster. The last station in this progress was at
the village of Charing. The hospitality of the brethren must have
been taxed to the utmost to provide accommodation for the retinue
<span class='pageno' id='Page_19'>19</span>accompanying the King, even if supplemented by the exertions of the
neighbouring hermitage of St. Catherine. The cross at Charing was
completed in the year 1294, and the brethren no doubt at this time had
many opportunities of conversing with the artists and handicraftsmen
who formed the very flourishing and remarkable school of art at
Westminster, and who were so enthusiastically encouraged both by
Henry III and his son Edward. It is quite possible that the Chapel
of the Convent may have benefited by the advice, or even by the
workmanship of Alexander “the Imaginator,” of Abingdon, and
William de Ireland, whose artistic handiwork formed so prominent a
feature of the Eleanor Crosses.</p>
<p class='c008'>The next records show that officials with foreign names are in
charge of the estate of Roncesvalles in England. In 1292 William de
Cestre and Peter Arnaldi de Santo Michaele are nominated attorneys
for five years for the Prior then staying beyond seas, and again, the
following year, we find Lupus de Canone concerned in the management
of the Roncesvalles property, having a lay person, Arnaldus de Sancto
Johanne, associated with him.</p>
<p class='c008'>Evidence of the vigour displayed by Brother Lupus in his
administration of the affairs of the Convent occurs in an entry in the
statement of accounts drawn up by the Executors of Queen Eleanor. It
gives the information that the Executors paid the comparatively large
sum of 14<i>l.</i> 2<i>s.</i> to Brother Lupus, Procurator of the
Hospital of Roncesvalles, as damages claimed by the brethren on
account of their houses at Southampton. This payment was made in the
year 1291, and not only indicates that the estate of Roncesvalles in
England was being watchfully managed, but also gives us the
information that the Convent still possessed the property at
Southampton, originally conveyed to them in the foundation-gift of
William Marshall.</p>
<p class='c008'>The brethren of St. Mary of Roncesvalles at Charing did not fail to
defend their rights when unjust inroads were made on their property.
There are indications that efforts, stimulated no doubt by the Mother
House, were made after periods of lax management—numerous in the
troubled times that followed—to repossess themselves of the rents and
property seized by powerful neighbours. These efforts were in many
cases successful, partly by the good will of charitably disposed persons,
partly by the influence of the Crown, but mainly by the sturdy support
of the rights of their House before the King’s Court.</p>
<p class='c008'>In the year 1294, the Prior of the Hospital claimed, by writ of entry,
one toft with appurtenances in Westminster from Adam, son of Walter
<span class='pageno' id='Page_20'>20</span>the Scot. It was admitted that the toft and tenements had been held
fifteen years previously by the Prior, who had lost them by default,
as he did not appear before the Court when the ownership of the
property was in question. The Convent made good its claim, though
it seems that Adam was quite willing to restore the property to the
Convent, but a special inquiry had to be made to show that there was
no collusion in permitting this property to pass in mortmain to the
religious house. It is of interest to note that the Prior, Garcia de
Ochoa, died in November, 1278, and was succeeded by the Prior Juan.
In the year 1279, when this property passed by default, difficulties may
have arisen on account of an interregnum at Roncesvalles.</p>
<p class='c008'>To this period an incident should probably be referred to which
attention is drawn in an undated petition from the Prior, requesting
that property lying before the Cross at Charing, to the extent of 3 acres,
and certain rents, should be restored. This property had been held for
a period of ten years by a certain John of Lincoln, Burgess of London,
and on his death had passed into the hands of the King on account of
default on the part of the Attorney of the Prior and Convent. This
petition quaintly recites as part of the evidence that the property
belonged to the Convent, that the fact was a matter of common
knowledge, “come les gentz dil pais le sauont bien et toute la veisinetee.”
The little incident has a strong resemblance to other successful claims
for their lost lands made under the stimulating influence of Brother
Lupus.</p>
<p class='c008'>During the troubled times when England was engaged in Continental
wars, soon to become almost continuous, communication
between Gascony and England must have been so difficult as to be
well-nigh impossible to men of peace. Convoys under military protection
were in imminent danger of capture, and from what we know,
especially in the case of naval warfare at this period, there were few
of the vanquished who escaped death. In addition to the dangers of
travelling another source of great difficulty was felt by the Prior and
his officials. The King was in constant and urgent need of money to
permit of the prosecution of his warlike policy, and his agents were
not too scrupulous as to how it was obtained. If it could be represented
that the property of the alien religious houses in the King’s dominions
could be used for the support of his enemies abroad, or if it could be
urged in extenuation that funds sent abroad by the alien communities
could be captured in transit, it is evident that the King would have
many excuses and would exercise little scruple in levying heavy
<span class='pageno' id='Page_21'>21</span>contributions on the property of the alien clergy in this country, or
even of confiscating it entirely. It was under these conditions that the
earliest suppressions and confiscations of the alien houses took place.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i021.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 8.</span><br />After an ancient drawing in the Gardner collection. On the left is part of the south end of the chapel of St. Mary Roncevall; in the foreground and to the right the gardens of the Convent. In the distance the river and the buildings of Whitehall and Westminster.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>In 1321 we have a very suggestive record that William Roberti,
Canon of the Hospital of St. Mary, is appointed Proctor-General in
England for the recovery of their lands and rents. The late Proctor,
John de Roncesvalles, had died, and the Prior in Navarre,<a id='r10' /><a href='#f10' class='c016'><sup>[10]</sup></a> not being
informed of the fact, did not appoint a new Proctor, “war and other
impediments hindering them, so that their lands and rents were taken
by divers men.” Immediately following, letters of protection are given
to William Roberti to aid him in his task, “in consideration of the
benefits constantly given in that Hospital to poor pilgrims visiting
the shrine of Santiago.” As the result of this vigorous action
the House of St. Mary Roncesvalles at Charing passed through
a period of comparative prosperity, for so late as 1335 a strong
policy still seems to have been pursued. In that year there is an
interesting record of the recovery of 10 acres of land known as
“Roncesvalcroft,” in Kensington. It was stated to have been abandoned
by the brethren and was in the occupation of a certain Simon de
Kensyngton. In such matters, however, the King’s agents were usually
very active. Simon de Kensyngton did not long remain in possession,
for the watchful eyes of William Trussel and Walter de Hungerford,
the King’s escheators, were upon him and they claimed the land for the
Crown. The legal argument in this dispute goes on to state how the
land, not being held directly from the Crown, was restored to the
brethren.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f10'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r10'>10</a>. </span>Andrés Ruiz de Medrano; <i>ob.</i> August 21, 1327 (?).</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>It was in the second quarter of the fourteenth century that the
community of St. Mary of Roncesvalles in this country appears to have
been most prosperous. The Convent at Charing Cross was the headquarters
of the brethren in our islands. The Procurator for the Prior
who managed the estates and collected the revenues had his residence
there. The property they possessed in London was the most valuable,
and consisted of plots of land in various parts of the suburbs, as well as
at Charing Cross, but the Convent also possessed a considerable amount
of property in Canterbury and at Oxford. Evidence remains that they
derived revenue from property in Norwich and that they had possessions
elsewhere in England, in Wales, in Ireland, and in Scotland. The
income derived from these possessions was sufficient to permit of a
subsidy towards the support of the Mother House in the Pyrenees.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_22'>22</span>At Charing Cross itself the Priory possessed a piece of land fronting
on the river and extending back to the roadway between London and
Westminster. The depth of this plot was then not so great as it is
now, for the waters of the river extended much nearer to Charing Cross
than at present.<a id='r11' /><a href='#f11' class='c016'><sup>[11]</sup></a> The position of Inigo Jones’s well-known watergate
at the foot of Buckingham Street, the last relic remaining of York
House, indicates the line of the river bank at a date over two hundred
years subsequent to the time now under consideration.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f11'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r11'>11</a>. </span>Charing Cross stood approximately on the site now
occupied by the statue of King Charles I.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>Occupying the most easterly part of the river frontage was situated
the Church of the Convent. This Church, or Chapel as it was usually
called in London, was built soon after the foundation of the Convent,
but there is evidence that considerable alterations and additions were
made much later, perhaps at the end of the fourteenth, and again during
the last phase of the existence of the house, in the fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries. Some idea of the appearance of the Chapel and the neighbouring
buildings may be gained by studying two ancient drawings
still in existence, made while the conventual buildings were standing.
One of these is the well-known sketch of London by Anthony Van den
Wyngaerde, dating from the middle of the sixteenth century. The
other is a very beautiful sketch in the Gardner collection which shows
a portion of the south-western end of the chapel, the gardens of the
Convent, and in the distance Whitehall and Westminster. Judging by
the evidence thus obtained, the chapel consisted of a rectangular nave,
built of stone. The type of work indicates that it was built about the
middle of the thirteenth century. There appear to have been two
storeys in this building, the lower storey with three large pointed
windows, and the upper storey with three smaller windows also pointed.
The upper part, with the small windows, may have formed the clerestory.
It is possible, however, that the upper part of the church was
cut off from the lower part, and that this upper storey was lighted by
the three smaller windows alluded to. Instances of this arrangement
are known to have occurred in the churches belonging to hospitals. In
such cases part of the church served the purpose of sheltering the sick,
while at the eastern end was the chapel proper, arranged so that the
sick should have the full benefit of the services of the church.</p>
<p class='c008'>The pitch of the chapel roof was steep, the form most easily constructed
at the period of which we speak, and was no doubt covered
with lead. A belfry was situated at the north-eastern end of the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_23'>23</span>chapel. Certain buildings of a much later date than the main part of
the edifice, and probably built of brick, are seen to have been added
to the northern and southern ends of the chapel, and along the river
front. From a terrace on the south-east side of the chapel stairs led
down to the water’s edge. Immediately to the west of the chapel were
the Convent gardens, extending in the direction of the roadway to
Westminster, and partly terraced to the river bank. Lying back from
the chapel were the conventual buildings and other tenements in the
possession of the community. These appear to have been arranged
on both sides of a court which opened on the high road close to the
cross.</p>
<div class='figcenter id003'>
<img src='images/i023.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 9.</span><br />The cross according to the use of Roncesvalles, from a stamp now used in the “Real Casa.” This ensign “unites in one figure the Cross, the Crozier, and the Sword.”</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>It is stated that over the doorway of each of these houses was
sculptured a cross, according to the use of Roncesvalles. There also
appears to have been a Latin inscription around or near the doorway
of the chapel indicating the date of an addition or restoration in the
time of Henry IV. The exact position occupied by the Hospital itself
cannot be now identified unless, as is very probable, the chapel itself
did duty both as a church and a hospital. The churchyard of the
community was probably situated in the lands to the south-west of the
conventual buildings. The situation of the chapel corresponds approximately
to the middle section of Charing Cross Railway Station in
alignment with York Gate and extending towards the land now occupied
by Craven Street and Northumberland Avenue.</p>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_24'>24</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Black Death (1348-49).</span></h3>
</div>
<p class='c018'>The event which seems to have done more than any other single
cause to depress the fortunes and to change the future relationships of
the foreign community of St. Mary was the catastrophe of the Black
Death. The plague visited London in the autumn of 1348. Its
ravages were serious in the early days of November, and the condition
of affairs had produced so much alarm that Parliament was prorogued
on January 1, 1349. A further prorogation occurred on March 10,
the reason given being that the “pestilence was continuing at Westminster,
in the City of London, and at other places, more severely than
before (<i>gravius solito</i>).” It had diminished, or almost disappeared, in
London by the end of that year. The clergy appear to have suffered
throughout the country even more severely than the rest of the
populace—evidence that they did not fail in their duties during that
terrible period. Geoffrey le Baker, a clerk of Osney, says, “Of the
clergy and cleric class there died a multitude known to God only.”<a id='r12' /><a href='#f12' class='c016'><sup>[12]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f12'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r12'>12</a>. </span>Creighton, “History of Epidemics in Britain,” 1891, Camb., i, chap. 3.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>What actually happened at Charing Cross can only be guessed, but
there are very clear indications that the Convent of St. Mary Roncevall
suffered severely. The deaths among the brethren were probably
numerous, for no one sufficiently important seems to have survived to
uphold the interests of the parent House. The depressed state of the
Convent is the more striking as the calamity occurred after a period of
great prosperity.</p>
<p class='c008'>When the plague ceased, and for some time after, the affairs of the
Convent appear to have been in complete confusion. The immense
mortality during the year of the prevalence of the plague disordered to
a serious extent the whole executive of the country, and especially
affected the Church. In some cases the community in the smaller
convents died out entirely, in others the senior members and officials
completely disappeared from the records, and in all cases serious losses
must have occurred. This fatality was not confined to the monastic
clergy alone; those holding benefices outside the religious houses
perished probably in greater numbers. The consequence was that
throughout the country rapid institutions to vacant benefices had to
be made to carry on the duties of those who had fallen, and frequently
unlettered, and in some cases unworthy, clerks succeeded to important
charges. These difficulties must have been much accentuated in the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_25'>25</span>case of alien houses. They suffered, as did all the other religious
communities, and in addition, they felt the difficulty of being remote
from the parent House. Officials who would have had the interests of
the House at heart could not be sent from abroad to take charge on
short notice, and the Prior at Roncesvalles, no doubt, did not even
know of the deaths of his subordinates at Charing Cross. The vacant
benefices in the possession of the alien houses were sought for and
obtained by clergy on the spot who had influence, and there can be no
doubt that the conclusion is correct, that many of these persons were
more concerned in advancing their own interests and in retaining the
possessions thus secured, than in guarding the rights of the foreign
abbey or priory. Not only, however, did the local clergy secure the
vacant benefices and property, but in many cases the property of the
alien houses was taken possession of by their influential neighbours,
sometimes without opposition, when the original possessors had entirely
disappeared, at other times by the high hand when the rightful owners
were few or feeble.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Conflict of Interest between Alien and English Clergy at Saint Mary Roncevall (1350-1414).</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>In spite of these adverse conditions the house of St. Mary Roncevall
survived, although new influences appear directing its affairs. The
earliest records after the Plague show that English clergy were in
possession of the Church and Hospital, and the title of Warden is made
use of for the first time by the chief clerical official. Special interest
appears to have been taken in its affairs by the Crown, perhaps because
its estate afforded a ready source of revenue, but more likely on account
of the proximity of the Convent to the Royal Palace at Westminster.
The Church and Hospital afforded convenient opportunities of preferment
and of income to the clergy connected with the Chapel Royal
of St. Stephen or of the Royal Household.</p>
<p class='c008'>The first records after the Plague are of special significance. In
1379, in the reign of Richard II, the chapel and lands of St. Mary
Roncevall were seized into the King’s hands in accordance with the
statute dated at Gloucester, “for the forfeiture of the lands of schismatic
aliens,” and in accordance with the policy of the Crown at this period
to suppress all the alien religious houses. At this time there was a
certain Nicholas Slake, a clerk, who, wise in his generation, had not
failed in procuring preferment and much advantage from the Church.
<span class='pageno' id='Page_26'>26</span>He possessed various benefices throughout the country, and finally
became Dean of the Chapel Royal of St. Stephen, Westminster, in the
year 1396.<a id='r13' /><a href='#f13' class='c016'><sup>[13]</sup></a> Nicholas Slake had obtained possession of the revenues
and had become Warden of the Hospital and Chapel of “Rounsyvale,”
probably when the Crown took possession of the property after the
forfeiture of 1379. In 1383, we find that the King grants a writ of
aid for Ralph Archer, Proctor of Nicholas Slake, Master of the Hospital
of St. Mary Roncevall, “to arrest and bring before the King and
Council all persons whom he shall prove to have collected alms in the
realm as Proctor of the Hospital, and converted the same to their
own use.”</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f13'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r13'>13</a>. </span>Hennessy, “Novum Repertorium Ecclesiasticum Parochiale Londinense.”</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>It seems probable that an effort had been made by Nicholas Slake
to put the affairs of his church in order, either on his own initiative, or
on account of the renewed interest taken in the house at Charing Cross
by the Mother Convent. It is noteworthy that about this time the Prior
and brethren at Roncesvalles commenced a process at law to claim their
property. An inquisition took place before the King’s Court at Westminster
into the foundation of the Hospital, and as it appeared in
evidence that the chapel and its property belonged to the Prior of
Roncesvalles, it was restored (April 23, 1383).</p>
<p class='c008'>There now appears to have been a short period of quiet and good
fortune for the brotherhood. It will be remembered that the years
1390-92 are known as the three “quiet” years of the Hundred Years’
War with France. Peaceful communications were restored between
Navarre, through France to England, so that we are not surprised to
find that in 1389, Garcias, a Canon of Roncesvalles, is ratified as
Warden of the Chapel of Roncevall by Charing Cross, at the supplication
of the King’s kinsman, Charles of Navarre. What happened in the
next year, 1390, is a little obscure. Garcias does not seem to have
been at home or comfortable at Charing Cross, or the influence of the
London clergy may have prevailed over the alien, for in that year we
note that John Hadham, the King’s clerk, is Warden of the Hospital.</p>
<p class='c008'>The following years must have brought much anxiety to the
remnants of the alien clergy in England. They must have become
more and more conscious of the insecurity of their tenure. England
was once more engaged in deadly war with France; communications
between the two countries were constantly interrupted or carried on
with great risk and danger, and in the case of the Hospital of St. Mary,
the sending of their surplus revenue to Navarre through France must
<span class='pageno' id='Page_27'>27</span>have been regarded by the King, constantly seeking funds for military
purposes, with the utmost jealousy. Most of the alien houses had
already been suppressed. The continued existence of the House of
St. Mary Roncevall, as mentioned above, had been seriously threatened.
The affairs, therefore, of the community of Charing Cross must have
been in great disorder and can have afforded little satisfaction to the
parent House. That the Prior did make efforts to supervise the affairs
of the Convent in England is clear, but the control must have been very
ineffective.</p>
<p class='c008'>In 1396, John Newerk obtained the wardenship and the property of
the Hospital, including the charters, various apostolic bulls and other
documents, and apparently installed himself comfortably in his benefice,
for in the year 1399 we find that ratification of the estate of Ronceval
was given to Newerk. In the meantime Francis, who was then Prior
at Roncesvalles, learned of the doings of John Newerk, and commenced
a process against him for having broken into the close and houses
belonging to the Prior in the parish of St. Martin’s in the Fields, of
having removed a sealed chest worth 20<i>s.</i>, containing the charters and
other muniments of the hospital, and claimed damages to the extent of
200<i>l.</i> This action seems to have dragged on for a wearisome length
of time, for in the year 1409 special directions are given by the King,
that, “whereas the suit has been long delayed, the justices are ordered
to proceed therein, but not to give judgment without consulting him.”
The plea was concluded in Hilary Term, 1409, and judgment was
given to the effect that at the time of the trespass the close and houses
were the sole and free tenement of the Prior, so that John Newerk was
mulcted in damages to the extent of 100 marks, but he was held not
guilty in respect of the matter of the chest and writings. Though the
Prior was largely successful in this action, his success did not long delay
the only possible issue.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Saint Mary Roncevall passes into the Hands of English Clergy (1414).</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The end of the strife between the Navarrese and English clergy for
supremacy in the House at Charing Cross was not far off. By the year
1414 the few remaining alien priories and convents were suppressed
by Henry V, but what influence this final suppression had on the
activities of the Convent of St. Mary Roncevall is not quite clear.
English clergy were already in possession of the appointments in the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_28'>28</span>Church and Hospital, and the services of the Convent to the people of
London seem to have continued. There arose no question of handing
over the property for secular purposes, and probably there was no
serious dislocation of the usual work of the House. The management
of its affairs must simply have been recognized to be entirely independent
of the Prior and his officials. It is to the credit of both parties
that this separation was accomplished without severe disturbance, for,
as we shall see, communications between the Prior at Roncesvalles and
the Warden of St. Mary Roncevall remained on what seems to have been
a friendly basis. The English wardens who were now appointed were,
so far as is known, men of note, and frequently in close relationship
with the Court.</p>
<p class='c008'>In 1417 Walter Sheryngton, Prebendary of Goderynghill, is
confirmed in his possession of the estate and the “free chapel” of
Rouncevall in the Diocese of London. During his tenure of office
there appears to have been an action at law between the Prior of the
Hospital and the Warden, the exact nature of which is uncertain;
but during its course the conditions of the early foundation of the
Convent at Charing Cross came under discussion.</p>
<p class='c008'>In 1432 Roger Westwode, who was also a Prebendary of the
Chapel Royal, St. Stephen’s, was Warden of the Chapel or Hospital
of St. Mary Roncevall. He was clearly conscious of the advantages
to be gained by the connexion with the House in the Pyrenees, as he
obtained a royal licence to receive bulls and letters of indulgence for
the profit of his own chapel from the Prior in Navarre, and also to
remit alms for the poor and other monies to the Priory. An echo of
the old difficulties can be noted in this document, as the royal licence
states clearly that the said Priory is “outside our allegiance, and the
licence is to continue so long as there is no war between us and the
King of Navarre.”</p>
<p class='c008'>The fortunes of the Hospital in the middle fifteenth century can
only be judged by inference, but there can be little doubt that it
continued to be useful, and that gradually its functions as a place for
the cure of the needy sick became more developed. The co-operation
of nursing sisters must have also become familiar to the London
community by this time. The brethren and sisters had pursued
their avocation in tending and in nursing the infirm from very early
days in the history of the community of St. Mary both in Navarre and
in England. As the religious house became more distinctly a hospital
their services must have been in constantly increasing request.</p>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_29'>29</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Establishment of the Fraternity of St. Mary Roncevall (1475).</span></h3>
</div>
<p class='c018'>The year 1475 marks the official commencement of the last stage
of the existence of the Hospital. In that year a royal charter of
Edward IV records the “foundation of a fraternity or perpetual gild
of a master, two wardens and the brethren and sisters who may
wish to be of the same in the Chapel of St. Mary Rounsidevall by
Charyng Crosse, and of a perpetual chantry of one chaplain to celebrate
divine service at the High Altar in the said chapel.” In 1478 a grant
in mortmain is recorded to the Master, Wardens, Brethren and
Sisters of the Fraternity of the said Chapel or Hospital, and of its
property, revenues and privileges, for the sustenance of the chaplain
and two additional clergy who now seem to have been required for the
services of the chapel, and of “the poor people flocking to the Hospital.”</p>
<p class='c008'>In the years following, the affairs of the Hospital seem to have
been administered with energy and prudence, for we have records in
1494, 1495 and 1496 of legal proceedings concerning the property and
privileges of the Hospital, in which the master and wardens vigorously
upheld their position and successfully defended their rights. The
litigation, which seems to have gone on intermittently chiefly for the
recovery of the ancient possessions of the Hospital, appears to have been
brought to a conclusion in the year 1510, when, in the Mastership of
Laurence Long, the fraternity paid the sum of 20<i>s.</i> into the hanaper
for the confirmation of the various charters granted to the fraternity by
the King.</p>
<p class='c008'>Again there seems to have been a period of comparative calm and,
no doubt, of successful performance of the duties of the Hospital.
The fraternity may have even thought that the storm which
burst over the Church in the time of Henry VIII would leave
them unharmed on account of the fulfilment of their useful functions
in the community, for so late as the year 1542, while William
Jenyns was Master, a record can be read giving evidence of their
continuing interest and careful management of their affairs. In this
year they obtained certain property and a wharf in the parish of
St. Margaret, in respect of rents to be paid from a tenement called
the “Shippe” and certain lands in the Parish of St. Clement Danes
without Temple Bar. This, however, is the last deed recorded of the
ancient community, with the exception of the final act which was
very soon to take place.</p>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_30'>30</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Dissolution of the Fraternity by Henry VIII (1544).</span></h3>
</div>
<p class='c018'>The policy of the King, enforced in many cases by the greed of his
agents and other members of the Court, could not leave the Hospital
unscathed, and not even the charitable deeds of the fraternity were
sufficient to save them from dispersion. The grief with which the
master, wardens and members of the fraternity assembled to ratify
their last official act in a corporate capacity may be conceived, and it
is possible to some faint extent to imagine the feelings of despair and
of bitter irony uppermost in the minds of the brethren and sisters when
they heard the words of the Deed of Surrender read aloud. In this
document the master, wardens, brethren and sisters of the fraternity
declared that they are “specially influenced at the present time by
divers causes and considerations to give and concede by this Charter
to the most excellent and invincible prince, our Lord Henry VIII, by
the Grace of God, King of England, France and Ireland, Defender of
the Faith and Supreme Head of the Church in England and Ireland,”
their Church, Hospital, and all other property and privileges. The
affixing of their Common Seal to this document concludes the
chequered history of the Convent of St. Mary Roncevall at Charing
Cross (November 11, 1544).</p>
<p class='c008'>Though the remaining members of the Community were deprived
of their offices and ejected from the home which they had so long
possessed at Charing Cross, their lot was not so hard as in the case
of many others driven into the world at this time. A pittance from
their income was left. There may be read in a book of payments
of Edward VI, under the heading “Pencions out of Monasteries” that
the guardians of Roncevall were allotted the munificent annual income
of 6<i>l.</i> 13<i>s.</i> 4<i>d.</i> Very oddly in this document the larger sum of 8<i>l.</i> is
entered and crossed out in favour of the smaller amount mentioned.
The amount of the pension was measured with parsimonious exactness.
Quarterly payments of 33 shillings and 4 pence are entered as being
paid to the few surviving members of the fraternity so late as at
Christmas, the Annunciation, Midsummer and Michaelmas, 1551 and 1552.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i030.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig.</span> 10.—The common seal of the Fraternity of St. Mary Roncevall.<br /><span class='sc'>Fig.</span> 11.—From the imperfect impression attached to the Deed of Surrender.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_31'>31</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Later History of the Estate of Roncevall.</span></h3>
</div>
<p class='c018'>The subsequent fate of the Chapel and Hospital and the land on
which they stood may be shortly stated. The site was granted, no
doubt with the buildings on it, in the year 1550 to Sir Thomas
Cawarden.<a id='r14' /><a href='#f14' class='c016'><sup>[14]</sup></a> Cawarden had been master of the revels to Henry VIII
and had established claims to reward or remuneration from the King
which had not been satisfied on his death. He was able to establish
and enforce these claims in the early years of Edward VI. With some
difficulty he obtained in discharge of his claims on the Crown the estate
and property of Roncevall and also the church and property of the
Blackfriars within the City of London. He seems also to have secured
at this time the stewardship of Nonsuch Palace and its lands in the
County of Surrey.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f14'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r14'>14</a>. </span>“A Survey of London,” by John Stow, 1603. The edition by
Charles L. Kingsford, Clarendon Press, 1908, i, p. 341; ii, p. 350.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The properties of Roncevall and of the Blackfriars soon passed from
the hands of Cawarden, probably during the period of wild speculation
in land and real estate which followed the dissolution of the religious
houses, but the stewardship of Nonsuch he continued to hold with much
tenacity in spite of the efforts to dislodge him from this favourite
position by Cardinal Pole during the reign of Queen Mary.</p>
<p class='c008'>Cawarden died in the year 1559. In the meantime the Roncevall
property had passed to Sir Robert Brett. It was purchased early in the
seventeenth century by Henry Howard, Earl of Northampton, who
built himself a town house, described as a “sumptuous palace,” on the
site, using for the purpose the material of the ancient Convent. This
house was completed in the year 1605 and was known for some years
as Northampton House. It consisted of buildings arranged on three
sides of a quadrangle, and open towards the garden and river. From
him the property passed by inheritance to his nephew, Thomas Howard,
first Earl of Suffolk, the second son of Thomas, fourth Duke of Norfolk,
who completed the quadrangle, the house being then known as Suffolk
House. From the Howard family the property passed by an heiress to
Algernon Percy, Earl of Northumberland, in 1642; another heiress of
the Percy family brought the property to Charles Seymour, Duke
of Somerset. While in the possession of the Somerset family and their
immediate successors, the Strand front was much improved and
acquired the architectural features so long associated with Northumberland
House at Charing Cross. By another heiress, Lady Elizabeth
<span class='pageno' id='Page_32'>32</span>Seymour, the property passed into the possession of the present Duke
of Northumberland’s family.</p>
<p class='c008'>In consequence of the construction of the Thames Embankment,
and the necessity for making a wide approach from Charing Cross, the
late Metropolitan Board of Works bought the property from the Duke
of Northumberland, in 1874, for the sum of £500,000. Northumberland
House, the last of the old river-side mansions, was completely demolished
and now Northumberland Avenue and the great buildings near it occupy
the site of the Convent and Hospital of St. Mary Roncevall.<a id='r15' /><a href='#f15' class='c016'><sup>[15]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f15'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r15'>15</a>. </span>“Old and New London,” V. iii, by Edward Walford (Cassell,
Petter and Galpin). “Charing Cross,” by J. H. MacMichael (Chatto and
Windus), 1905.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_33'>33</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Roncevall Property in London; from Information in an unpublished Manuscript of the beginning of the Seventeenth Century in the Library at Roncesvalles.</span><a id='r16' /><a href='#f16' class='c016'><sup>[16]</sup></a></h3>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote c000' id='f16'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r16'>16</a>. </span>The author is indebted to Don José Urrutia, the Abbot-Prior, for a
précis of this document.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>Most of the ancient documents dealing with the history of the Priory
have been destroyed or lost as the result of war, fires and other
causes. There remains in the Library at Roncesvalles an unpublished
MS. dealing with the early history of the Priory and its dependencies,
written about the second quarter of the seventeenth century by Don
Juan Huarte. This MS. incorporates information obtained by the writer
from various sources, and especially under the date April 12, 1623,
from a certain Brother Miguel de Spiritu Sancto, who derived it in his
turn from a certain Don Francisco Olastro—(Francis Oliver?)—who is
stated to have been an ambassador from England in Madrid. This
document states that there is situated in the suburbs of London a wide
street named “the Street of Our Lady of Roncesvalles.” The houses in
this street have sculptured over their doorways a single cross
according to the use of Roncesvalles. At the end of the street is a
large building, now nearly dismantled, which was a sumptuous church in
the time of the Catholic Religion. Over the portico of the church were
sculptured three crosses of the same form, and in addition there was a
clearly engraved Latin inscription to the effect that this church was
built and completely finished in honour of the Blessed Virgin by Henry
IV, King of England, who, in addition, granted to the Community of St.
Mary of Roncevall large possessions and revenues for the service of
the Priory and Hospital. The inscription is dated in the MS. 1378, but
this date, which is clearly impossible, is probably an error of
transcription for 1408, arising from peculiarities in the formation of
the figures, and there are other errors to be noted, showing that the
information is derived through indirect channels. The inscription is
given as follows:—</p>
<p class='c019'>“Henricus quartus Dei gratia Rex Angliæ, Iberniæ et Irlandæ, Princeps
Gales, et Dux (<i>Lancastrie?</i>). Hanc ecclesiam sacratissimæ Virginis et
Matris Mariæ construxit locupletavit et a fundamentis edificavit, et eam in
honorem dictæ Sanctissimæ Virginis et Matris multis possessionibus et
redditibus et inquiliniis ditavit, et eam cum suis omnibus possessionibus,
inquiliniis subditis et redditibus donavit in donum perpetuum ordini et
hospitali generali coenobii Sanctæ Mariæ Roncesvallis in anno domini
Salvatoris nostri Jhesu Christi, MCCCLXXVIII.”</p>
<p class='c018'>The document goes on to say that the Priory possessed in England property
including the Chapel and Convent at Charing Cross (“Caringrasso”) of the
yearly value of 9,300 pounds English money, corresponding to 8,223 Spanish
<span class='pageno' id='Page_34'>34</span>ducats, and that it also owned property in Canterbury (“Conturbel”) of the
yearly value of 4,000 pounds, and in Oxford (“Oxonia”) of 5,700 pounds.
A Procurator was appointed directly by the Abbot at Roncesvalles, who had
his headquarters in London at Charing Cross, and had complete powers of
administration to deal with the property of the Convent scattered through
England, Scotland, and Ireland, and he also directed the Hospital and other
enterprises of the Brotherhood.</p>
<p class='c008'>The Huarte MS. also states that, in the ancient archives of the Abbey
there existed a record in alphabetical arrangement, from which it is
gathered that Henry VI of England, finding that no official was being
sent from Roncesvalles, directed one of his chaplains to obtain from
Roncesvalles an account of the property in London and Charing Cross
belonging to the Priory: “Las pertenecientes á la capilla y encomienda
de Roncesvalles situada junto á Caringrasso de Inglaterra,”
and a warrant to collect the income and charitable
contributions and send them to Roncesvalles for the maintenance of the
clergy and the poor. There is also a statement on the authority of a
“military personage in the City of London,” that there existed in
London a large house which had belonged to Roncesvalles, as shown by
the crosses of the special form used by the Order still to be seen on
the stones, and that this house had been converted into a seminary of
the Anglican Church.</p>
<p class='c008'>It will be observed that much of the information in the Huarte MS. is
traditional and cannot be accepted without careful collation with the more
complete and authentic information contained in the English records. It is,
however, of much interest to know that a document perpetuating the memory
of the Hospital of Roncevall in London still exists in the parent House.</p>
<div class='chapter'>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_35'>35</span>
<h2 class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Illustrations.</span></h2>
</div>
<p class='c015'><span class='sc'>Fig. 1.</span>—The Chapel of St. Mary Roncevall on the bank of the
Thames previous to 1544. The chapel is of the middle of the thirteenth
century, in two storeys, with later additions, probably of the Tudor
period, to the south of the church and at the north-east angle. The
tower and belfry are at the north-east end of the church. The chapel
is built on a terrace, faced by a high wall, pierced by a door giving
access by steps to the river. The sketch gives indications of portions
of the conventual buildings, some of which may be identified by
referring to the inventory contained in the grant to Sir Thomas
Cawarden; for instance, the gardens, the churchyard, wharf, the
almshouse. The Cross at Charing, St Martin’s Church of that period,
other features in the village of Charing, and St. Giles’s in the
Fields, may be identified.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='sc'>Fig. 2.</span>—A chart of the Western Pyrenees, showing the roads
through the passes, and the position of Roncesvalles and Ibañeta.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='sc'>Figs.</span> 3 and 4.—The effigy of William Marshall, Earl of
Pembroke (<i>ob.</i> 1219), in the Temple Church.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='sc'>Figs.</span> 5, 6, and 7.—The effigy of William Marshall, Earl of
Pembroke, son of the preceding (<i>ob.</i> 1231). These figures of the
Marshalls are from Edward Richardson’s “Monumental Effigies of the
Temple Church.” Longmans, 1843. William Marshall, sen., the regent,
and his son were closely associated with the Knights Templars, and
benefactors of the Order. It will be noted that the effigy of the
father shows the figure in a straight position, whereas the effigy of
the son is in the cross-legged attitude. The question is naturally
raised as to the significance of the cross-legged position. There is
no doubt that William Marshall the elder did go to the Holy Land in
fulfilment of the dying request of Henry, the eldest son of Henry II,
in the years 1185-87. In the case of the son there is no evidence of a
journey to Palestine, though it is possible that he may have taken
part in campaigns against the Moors in Spain.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='sc'>Fig. 8.</span>—A copy of an ancient drawing lately in the possession
of Mr. E. Gardner, now in the collection of Sir Edward F. Coates,
Bart. The drawing is supposed to be contemporary and to have been the
work of an early Italian artist resident in England. It was purchased
at the Strawberry Hill sale by Dr. Wellesley for the Gardner
collection; and the Marquis of Salisbury is stated to have several
drawings by the same early Italian artist. The sketch shows part of
the north-westerly aspect of the Chapel of St. Mary Roncevall, with
some of the later Tudor additions. The battlements were probably added
when additions were built, perhaps in the time of Henry IV, or later.
The Tudor chimneys appearing over the battlements are reminiscent of
the work of Cardinal Wolsey at Hampton Court and would have been
constructed in brick. The building on the extreme left of the sketch
is probably the corner of a north porch. The sketch also shows the
gardens of the Convent of which very special note is made in
Cawarden’s inventory, and in the distance the buildings of Whitehall
and of Westminster.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_36'>36</span><span class='sc'>Fig. 9.</span>—Copy of an official stamp now used in the Priory,
showing the Cross of Roncesvalles.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='sc'>Figs.</span> 10 and 11.—The common seal of the Fraternity and Guild
of St. Mary Roncevall. The seal appears to be of the fifteenth century
and was no doubt the seal specially mentioned as being given to the
Fraternity by Edward IV. The seal is round, the engraved part being
2-1/4 in. in diameter. Unfortunately the impression is imperfect.</p>
<p class='c008'>Fig. 10 is from a cast taken by Doubleday in the middle of the last
century.</p>
<p class='c008'>Fig. 11 is from a cast taken by Mr. Ready from the impression still
attached to the Deed of Surrender. It will be noted on careful
examination that there are certain interesting differences in the
state of preservation of these two casts. The seal on the Deed of
Surrender has been backed and strengthened, but this repair does not
altogether account for the differences noticed in the impressions. It
is possible that another impression may have existed when Doubleday
made his cast. The seal represents “the assumption of the Virgin, who
is standing on a crescent upheld by an angel and surrounded by
radiance. At each side three flying angels issuing from clouds.
Overhead in clouds the Trinity. The legend reads:—</p>
<div class='nf-center-c0'>
<div class='nf-center'>
<div>‘SIGILLU(M COĒ FRATER)NITATIS BĒ MARIE DE ROUNCIVA(LL).’”</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='c020'>(Birch’s Catalogue of Seals.)</div>
<p class='c008'>The author cannot conclude this account of the Convent and Hospital
without expressing his cordial thanks to those from whom he has sought
assistance and criticisms. He desires especially to acknowledge his
obligations to Mr. E. Salisbury and other officials of the Public Record
Office for their courteous and patient guidance; to Mr. E. Gardner for
his kind permission to see the valuable collection of material illustrating
the history of London formerly in his possession, and to reproduce one
of the drawings in this paper; to Mr. Herbert Wigglesworth and his
assistant, Mr. L. H. Glencross, for drawings of the Chapel of St. Mary,
and for important criticisms respecting its structure and architectural
features; and to Don José Urrutia, the Abbot-Prior, and Don Ignacio
Ibarbia Fernandez de Guevara, Canon of Roncesvalles, for much
information respecting the present state of the Convent, and for their
sympathetic interest in the history of one of the ancient “cells” of
the Real Colegiata.</p>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_37'>37</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Calendar of the Hospital of St. Mary Roncevall, Charing Cross.</span></h3>
</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>ANNO 1229.</div>
<p class='c017'>Letters of Protection to the Brethren of St. Mary Roncesvalles.</p>
<p class='c017'><i>De Protectione.</i> Fratres hospitalis Sancti Marie Roscidi Vallis habent
literas de protectione sine termino cum hac clausula:—</p>
<p class='c017'>“Rogamus vos quatinus cum nuncii ejusdem hospitalis ad vos venerint
elemosinas petituri,” &c.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calendar Patent Rolls, 13 Henry III, p. 265.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1232.</div>
<p class='c017'>Record of the grant to St. Mary and the Hospital of Roncevaux (Roscida
Vallis) of the gift which William Marshall, sometime Earl of
Pembroke, made to them of all his houses at Cherring, and the
houses and curtilages adjoining them, formerly belonging to William
Briwere, and of 100<i>s.</i> at Suthanton, payable from the houses of
the said Earl there, of 13<i>l.</i> of land in the Moor of Magor and of
a carucate of land in Assendon which he bought from Robert de
Rochford. 11th August; Wenlock.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Charter Rolls, 16 Henry III, p. 168.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1240.</div>
<p class='c017'>Grant by the King to the Brethren of “Roscida Valle” of 32 acres
which they have sown in Pevensey, of land which William
Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, gave to them. 26th July; Quicfeld.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Close Rolls, 24 Henry III, m. 8.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1242.</div>
<p class='c017'>Grant of pasturage by King Henry III beyond the water called
“Lador” (Adour) to the Prior and Brethren of the Hospital of St.
Mary Roncevaux. La Sauve Majeure.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 26-27 Henry III, p. 334.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1242.</div>
<p class='c017'>Bond by the King for payment of 90 pounds of Morlaas to Dominic
Paschalis, Provost of Roncevaux. La Sauve Majeure.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 27 Henry III, p. 349.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1253.</div>
<p class='c017'>Simple protection, without term, for the prior and brethren of the
Hospital of St. Mary, Rouncevall. 11th February; Windsor.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 37 Henry III, m. 17.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1253.</div>
<p class='c017'>Protection for one year for the Master and brethren of Roscidevalle,
with this clause, that all their beasts may feed throughout the
King’s land of Gascony, as they have been accustomed to do.
1st October: Benauge.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 37-38 Henry III, m. 20.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1254.</div>
<p class='c017'>Protection for four years, as above. 26th August; Bordeaux.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 37-38 Henry III, m. 8.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1278.</div>
<p class='c017'><span class='pageno' id='Page_38'>38</span>Henry, son of William of Smalebrok, nominated Attorney for 2 years
for the Prior of the Hospital of Roncevaux. Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 6 Ed. I, p. 283.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1279.</div>
<p class='c017'>The sum of 16<i>l.</i> 13<i>s.</i> 4<i>d.</i> charged on the pedage of
“Maramande” (Myramand), to be paid to the hospital of Roncevaux
(Rossidevall). Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 7 Ed. I, p. 7.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1280.</div>
<p class='c017'>Henry, son of William of Smalebrok, nominated Attorney for 2 years
for the Prior of the Hospital of Roncedevall. Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 8 Ed. I, p. 382.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1281.</div>
<p class='c017'>Note in a Record of Accounts that the King’s lands granted to Eleanor
his mother, of the town of Myramand, are charged with 20<i>l.</i>
Arvaldenses equivalent to 16<i>l.</i> 13<i>s.</i> 4<i>d.</i> of Tours
to the hospital of Rossedevall. Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 9 Ed. I, p. 447.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1283.</div>
<p class='c017'>Protection for Brother Lupus, Priest, Envoy, and Preceptor of the
Houses in England and Ireland of the Prior and Convent of the
Hospital of St. Mary Roncevaux, coming from the Pope with
indulgences for the remission of sins. Macclesfield.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 11 Ed. I, p. 75.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1290.</div>
<p class='c017'>G. Prior and the Hospital of Roncevaux (Roscida Vallis) to Edward I,
praying the King to be attentive to what shall be told him by
certain Brethren of the Hospital who are bearing the present letter
to England and to grant their request. 2 Id. July.</p>
<div class='c020'>Ancient Correspondence, vol. xx, No. 44.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1291.</div>
<p class='c017'><i>Emendæ.</i> Item, fratre Lupo procuratori Hospitali Runcivallis dampnis
fratrum dicti Hospitalis adjudicatis coram auditoribus querelarum
pro domibus suis Suthamtonæ xiiij <i>li</i>, ij <i>s.</i>
xiiij <i>li</i>, ij <i>s.</i></p>
<p class='c021'>19 Ed. I. Extract. Liberationes factæ per
Executores Dominæ Alienoræ Consortis
Edwardi Regis Angliæ Primi: Rot. primus.</p>
<p class='c022'>(<i>Vide</i> Manners and Household expenses of England: p. 105,
Roxburghe Club; edited by T. Hudson Turner, presented
by Beriah Botfield: 1841 (London, William Nicol,
Shakespeare Press).</p>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1292.</div>
<p class='c017'>William de Cestre, and Peter Arnaldi de Sancto Michaele nominated
attorneys for 5 years for the Prior of Roncyvall staying beyond
seas. Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 20 Ed. I, p. 476.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1293.</div>
<p class='c017'><span class='pageno' id='Page_39'>39</span>Lupus de Canone, preceptor of the Houses of Ronceval in Bordeaux,
and Arnaldus de Sancto Johanne, a lay person, nominated
attorneys for the Prior of Ronceval (Roscidevall), staying beyond
seas for three years. 12th May; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 21 Ed. I, p. 14.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1293-94.</div>
<p class='c017'>The Prior of the Hospital of Rosci de Vall seeks against Adam, son
of Walter the Scot, one toft with appurtenances as the right
of the said Hospital, by writ of entry. A predecessor of the
Prior is admitted to have held this toft and tenements 15 years
previously (in 1279).</p>
<div class='c020'>Assize Rolls, No. 544, 22 Ed. I, m. 21.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>Probably late Ed. I, or Ed. II.</div>
<p class='c017'>A petition from the Prior of the Convent and Hospital of Roncevall
to restore to them property consisting of a site before the Cross
at Charing, and also certain other small rents and three acres
of land which John of Lincoln, Burgess of London, had held
for a period of ten years, and which on his death, on account
of the default of the Attorney of the said Prior and Convent
and Hospital, were taken into the hand of the King. The
petition requests the restoration of this property to the Prior
and Convent to hold them as they had been in the custom of
doing “come les gentz dil pais le sauont bien et toute la
veisinetee.” Undated.</p>
<div class='c020'>Ancient Petitions, 9635.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1310.</div>
<p class='c017'>Evidence of property held in Norwich by the House of Roncevaux, in
a licence for alienation in mortmain by William But of Norwich,
to the Friars Preachers of that place. 30th March; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 3 Ed. II, p. 222.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1321.</div>
<p class='c017'>William Roberti, Canon of the Hospital of St. Mary Roncevall, appointed
Proctor in England for the recovery of their lands and
rents. Their late Proctor, John de Rouncevall, having died, and
not being aware of his death, they did not appoint a new Proctor,
wars and other impediments hindering them, so that their lands
and rents were taken by divers men. 24th August; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 15 Ed. II, p. 23.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1321.</div>
<p class='c017'>Protection granted to the messengers sent to England by William
Roberti, Canon of the Hospital of St. Mary Roncevall, and
Proctor-General in England of the Prior and Convent of that
place, in consideration of the benefits constantly given in that
hospital to poor pilgrims visiting the shrine of Santiago. 25th
August; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 15 Ed. II, p. 15.</div>
<p class='c017'><span class='pageno' id='Page_40'>40</span>F. (?) Prior and the Hospital of Roncevaux to Edward II, on behalf of
the citizens of Bayonne, greatly impoverished by the late wars.</p>
<div class='c020'>Ancient Correspondence, xxxiv, No. 167.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1335.</div>
<p class='c017'>An account of the abandonment of the 10 acres of land known as
“Ronsevalcroft,” in Kensyngton, by the brethren of the Hospital
of Roncevaux; how the land was taken by Simon de Kensyngton
without the King’s licence, escheated to the Crown, and finally
restored to the Convent. 12th July; Carlisle.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Close Rolls, 9 Ed. III, p. 423.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1348-49.</div>
<p class='c017'><span class='sc'>The Black Death.</span></p>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1379.</div>
<p class='c017'>The chapel and lands of St. Mary Rounceval seized into the King’s
hands in accordance with a statute, dated at Gloucester, for the
forfeiture of the lands of schismatic aliens. 2 Ric. II.</p>
<div class='c020'>Cf. Close Rolls, 10 Henry IV, m. 7. 1409, <i>vide infra</i>.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1382.</div>
<p class='c017'>Nicholas Slake,<a id='r17' /><a href='#f17' class='c016'><sup>[17]</sup></a> Master of the Hospital of St. Mary Roncevalles.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f17'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r17'>17</a>. </span>Hennessy: “Nov. Repert. Ecclesiast. Paroch. Londin.”
Nicholas Slake, Prebendary of Wenlakesbarn; of Erdington in
Briggenorth; of Shirecote in Tamworth; Rector of St. Mary Abchurch;
and Dean of St. Stephen’s Chapel Royal, Westminster (1396).</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The King grants a writ of aid for Ralph Archer, Proctor of Nicholas
Slake, to arrest and bring before the King and Council all persons
whom he shall prove to have collected alms in the realm as proctor
of the Hospital, and converted the same to their own use.
18th July. Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 6 Ric. II, p. 195.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1383.</div>
<p class='c008'>Inquisition into the foundation of the Hospital of Rouncevall, before
the King’s Court at Westminster.</p>
<p class='c008'>Plac. coram Rege apud West. de term. Mich. 7 Ric. II, Rot. 21
Middx.; also Chancery Miscellanea, 68/466.</p>
<p class='c008'>It appears that the Crown had resumed possession of the Hospital and
land and all its possessions after the forfeiture of 1379, and that a
cleric, Nicholas Slake, had obtained the Wardenship of the Hospital
and Chapel of “Rounsyvale.” On inquisition, however, it
was shown that the Hospital and Chapel and its property pertained
to the Prior of the Hospital of the Blessed Mary of Rounsyvall,
and was accordingly restored. 23rd April.</p>
<div class='c020'>Cf. Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, edit. 1820, vi, pt. 2, p. 677.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1389.</div>
<p class='c008'>Garcias, Canon of Roncivale, ratified as Warden of the Chapel of
Roncivall by Charyncroix, at the supplication of the King’s kinsman,
Charles of Navarre. 16th November; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 13 Ric. II, p. 152.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1390.</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_41'>41</span>John Hadham, the King’s clerk, Warden of the Hospital of St. Mary of
Ronsyvale at Charryng by Westminster. 18th February; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 13 Ric. II, p. 205.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1396.</div>
<p class='c008'>Grant for life to John Newerk of the Wardenship of the Hospital of
St. Mary Rouncyvall by Charryng Crouch. 20th October; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 20 Ric. II, p. 30, pt. 1, m. 15.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1396.</div>
<p class='c008'>Grant to John Newerk of the Hospital of St. Mary Rouncyvall. 5th
October; Calais.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 20 Ric. II, p. 44, pt. 1, m. 6.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1399.</div>
<p class='c008'>Ratification of the estate of John Newerk, Warden of the Hospital of
St. Mary Rouncyvale by Charing Crouch. 28th October; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 1 Henry IV, p. 25, pt. 1, m. 16.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1409.</div>
<p class='c008'>Exemplification at the request of John Newerk, of:—</p>
<p class='c023'>(1) Letters patent dated 5th October, 20 Richard II (1396), granting
to him the hospital of St. Mary Rouncyvall.</p>
<p class='c023'>(2) Letters patent dated 20th October, 20 Richard II, granting to him
for life the wardenship of the hospital of St. Mary Rouncyvall by
Charryngcrouch. 5th February; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 10 Henry IV, pt. 1, m. 10.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1409.</div>
<p class='c008'>Francis, Prior of the Hospital of St. Mary de Rouncyvall of the
diocese of Pampeluna and Warden of St. Mary of Rouncyvall by Charyng
Crosse, impleaded John Newerk, clerk, for having broken into a close
and houses of the said Prior in the parish of St. Martin’s in the
Fields, and taken away a sealed chest worth 20<i>s.</i>, containing
charters, writings, bulls, apostolic instruments and other muniments,
and committed other offences to the damage of £200 in the reign of
Richard II. John Newerk alleges that the said chapel and all its
property had been seized in the King’s hands according to the statute
dated at Gloucester, 2 Ric. II, and that afterwards the Wardenship of
the said chapel was granted to the said John by letters patent, dated
20th October, 20 Ric. II, and that he is not answerable for the above
property, etc., to the said Prior without consulting the King, and
whereas the suit has been long delayed the King orders the Justices to
proceed therein, but not to give judgment without consulting him.
Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Close Roll, 10 Henry IV, m. 7 (see also m. 11).</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1409.</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_42'>42</span>Record of the above-mentioned plea between Francis, Prior of St. Mary
de Rouncyvall, and John Newerk, Clerk, returned on a writ <i>de causis
certiorari</i>, dated 1st September, 5 Henry V, 1417.</p>
<p class='c008'>Placita coram rege, Hilary Term. 10 Henry IV, 1409.</p>
<p class='c008'>This document recites the conditions of the trespass of John Newerk
on the Monday after the Feast of All Saints, 21 Ric. II, when
with force and arms he broke into the close and houses of the
said Prior in the town of Westminster, mentioning the sealed chest
and charters and the amount of damage done to the Prior. It
continues to recite John Newerk’s defence and especially that he,
John Newerk, had been granted the custody of the said Chapel.</p>
<p class='c008'><i>Judgment:</i> That at the time of the trespass the close and houses
were the sole and free tenement of the said Prior—damages for the said
Prior 100 marks. As to the said chest and writings the said Newerk is
found “not guilty.”</p>
<div class='c020'>Chancery Miscellanea, 68/466.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1411.</div>
<p class='c008'>Pardon to John Newerk, Clerk, for his outlawry in the County of
Middlesex for not appearing before the King to satisfy the Prior
of St. Mary Rouncivall ... of 100 marks which the Prior
recovered against him on account of a trespass in the time of
Richard II, he having surrendered to the Marshalsea Prison and
satisfied the Prior. 5th May; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 12 Henry IV, m. 12.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1417.</div>
<p class='c008'>Confirmation to Walter Shiryngton,<a id='r18' /><a href='#f18' class='c016'><sup>[18]</sup></a> Prebendary of Goderynghill, in
the Collegiate Church of Westbury, of the free chapel of Rouncevale,
in the diocese of London, of his estate and possession to the
said prebend and chapel. Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Pat. Roll, 5 Henry V, m. 10. (By Privy seal.)</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f18'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r18'>18</a>. </span>Hennessy: Loc. cit. Walter Shiryngton, Prebendary of Gevendale oin
York; of Offley; of Mora, &c.; Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster;
<i>ob.</i> 1448. Buried in St. Paul’s Cathedral.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1418.</div>
<p class='c008'>Recorda 5 Henry V, pt. 1. “Recordum et processus inter Prior Hosp.
beate Mar. ibidem et Custodem Capelle ibidem ubi fit mentio de
primata fundatione.”</p>
<p class='c008'>The reference of this note has not been found in the Memoranda Rolls
of the reign of Henry V.</p>
<div class='sidenote'>1432.</div>
<p class='c008'>Royal licence to “our chaplain,” Roger Westwode,<a id='r19' /><a href='#f19' class='c016'><sup>[19]</sup></a> Master of the
Chapel or Hospital of St. Marie de Roncidevall by Charyngcroix
in the diocese of London, his successors or their proctors, to
<span class='pageno' id='Page_43'>43</span>receive bulls and other letters of indulgence for the profit of
the said Chapel, from the Prior and Convent of Rouncidevall in
Navarre, in the diocese of Pamploma, and to remit alms for the
poor and other moneys to the Priory in Navarre, because the said
Priory is outside our allegiance, to last so long as there is no war
between us and the King of Navarre. Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Pat. Roll, 11 Henry VI, pt. 1, m. 16.</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f19'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r19'>19</a>. </span>Hennessy: Loc. cit. Roger Westrode, Prebendary of St. Stephen’s Royal
Chapel, Westminster, 1422; <i>ob.</i> 1433.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1440.</div>
<p class='c008'>Grant to John Gourney of a parcel of land, late of the King of Scotland,
lying between a plot of the Archbishop of York towards the south,
and the chapel of St. Mary Rouncevale towards the north (etc.).
1st April; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 18 Henry VI, pt. 3, m. 12.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1440.</div>
<p class='c008'>Grant of the alien Priories in England and Wales to Henry, Archbishop
of Canterbury, and others.</p>
<div class='c020'>Rymer’s Fœdera. 12th September, 19 Henry VI.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1475.</div>
<p class='c008'>Foundation of a fraternity or perpetual gild of a Master, and two
Wardens, and the Brethren and Sisters who may wish to be of
the same in the Chapel of St. Mary Rounsidevall by Charyng
Crosse in the suburbs of London: “They shall form one body,
and shall have perpetual succession and a Common Seal”; and
of a perpetual Chantry of one Chaplain to celebrate divine service
daily at the High Altar in the said Chapel, for the good estate of
the King and his Consort Elizabeth, Queen of England, and his
firstborn son Edward, and the Brethren and Sisters of the fraternity,
and for their souls after death. 28th October; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 15 Ed. IV, pt. 2, m. 10, p. 542.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1478.</div>
<p class='c008'>Grant in mortmain to the Master, Wardens, Brethren and Sisters of
the fraternity or gild in the Chapel of St. Mary de Rouncidevale, by
Charing Crosse, of the said Chapel or Hospital, and of its property,
oblations, and other privileges, for the sustenance of three chaplains
celebrating divine service, and of the poor people flocking to the
Hospital; provided that they grant for life to Elizabeth Berde,
widow, 6 marks yearly for her sustenance, and a fair house for
her by the said Chapel or Hospital. 9th March; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Calend. Pat. Rolls, 18 Ed. IV, pt. 2, m. 34, p. 114.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1494-95.</div>
<p class='c008'>A suit brought against the Warden of the Chapel of St. Marie de
Rounsewal as to half an acre of land. There follows a long
legal argument respecting the patronage of the Chapel, and
other matters.</p>
<div class='c020'>Year Book. 10 Henry VII, Easter Term (No. 5).</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1495-96.</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_44'>44</span>Argument as to whether the Hospital can plead under the name
of the Master and Wardens only, or under the full title of
Master, Wardens, Brethren and Sisters of Rounceval.</p>
<p class='c008'>Licence to plead in the former designation appears to have been
granted in their patent of incorporation.</p>
<div class='c020'>Year Book. 11 Henry VII, Trinity Term (No. 12).</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1509-10.</div>
<p class='c008'>Laurence Long, Master, Robert Day and William Goodwyn, Wardens
of the Fraternity or Gild in the Chapel of Saint Mary Rounceval
juxta Charing Cross, pay 20<i>s.</i> into the Hanaper for the confirmation
of various letters granted to the Fraternity by the
King and certain of his progenitors.</p>
<div class='c020'>L.T.R. Originalia Roll. 1 Henry VIII, Rot. 139.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1539-44.</div>
<p class='c008'>A statement by the Treasurer of the Court of Augmentations of
payments made by the King’s warrant in 1542-43 includes two
payments of 40<i>li.</i> and 44<i>s.</i> on the 28th April and 1st May, 1542,
respectively, to William Jenyns, Master of the Fraternity of
Roncevalle, for the use of the Wardens there, made by virtue of
a deed of exchange bearing the date 13th March, 1542 (33
Henry VIII), between His Majesty and the Master and Wardens,
leaving a balance still due from the King of 43<i>li.</i> 4<i>s.</i></p>
<p class='c008'>The Account of Edward North, Lord Treasurer of
the Court of Augmentations (31 and 35 Henry VIII).</p>
<div class='c020'>Roll 2 B., pt. 1, m. 80.</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1542.</div>
<p class='c008'>Will. Jenyns,<a id='r20' /><a href='#f20' class='c016'><sup>[20]</sup></a> Master, and John Ap Hoell and Ric. More, Wardens of
the fraternity or gild of St. Mary Rouncedevall by Charing Crosse,
near London, grant in exchange for three messuages and one wharf
in the parish of Saint Margaret, certain rents to be paid from the
messuage or tenement called the “Shippe” and a field of land
called “Cuppefeld,” adjoining a field called “Conninggarfeld of
Lyncolnes Inne,” in the parish of St. Clement Danes without
Temple Barre, Midd.; which belonged to St. John’s of Jerusalem.
12th April; Greenwich.</p>
<div class='c020'>Pat. Roll, 33 Henry VIII, pt. 6, m. 11. Calend. of State Papers</div>
<div class='c020'>Domestic, Henry VIII, vol. xvii, p. 162.</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f20'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r20'>20</a>. </span>Hennessy; Loc. cit. A William Jenyns was Rector of St. Mary Staining,
1583-84.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1544.</div>
<p class='c008'>The Deed of Surrender, whereby the Master, Wardens, Brethren and
Sisters of the Fraternity or Gild of the Chapel of Saint Mary of
Rounsidevall by Charinge-crosse, in the suburbs of London, concede
to the King in perpetuity all rights and ownership in the said
<span class='pageno' id='Page_45'>45</span>Chapel and Church of Saint Mary of Rounsidevall, the Belfry and
Cemetery adjacent to the Chapel, likewise all messuages, houses,
buildings, lands, tenements, meadows, grazing-lands, pastures,
rents, reversions, services, and other hereditaments whatsoever.
(11th November.)</p>
<div class='c020'>Deed of Surrender. No. 138, Augmentation Office.</div>
<p class='c015'><i>The impression of the Common Seal of the Fraternity is attached.</i></p>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1550.</div>
<p class='c008'>(Abstract.) Grant to Sir Thomas Cawarden, knight, one of the
gentlemen of the Privy Chamber (in completion and performance
of a grant of the same premises made to him by Henry VIII
before his journey into France in the 35th year of his reign, the
letters patent for which were never made and sealed), of the following
premises: All that Chapel of the late Hospital of St. Mary
de Rowncevall, in the parish of St. Martin’s, late called the parish
of St. Margaret’s, with the churchyard thereto belonging containing
about 1-1/2 roods; also the messuage called the almeshouse, 80 feet
north and south by 23 feet east and west; also “le wharff,” a
stable, and all cellars and land called “le bakeside”; one garden
108 feet by 104 feet; 2 other gardens, 150 feet by 50 feet, and 120
feet by 45 feet respectively; another garden 126 feet by 84 feet,
abutting on the south on a piece of vacant ground called Scotland
and on the east on the water flowing in “le barge-house” and on
the west upon “le comon Sewer”; another garden 102 feet by
84 feet; a messuage; a shop called “le longe shoppe” (the above
are in the respective tenures of John Rede, Richard Attsell, Hugh
Haward, John Yonge, and Richard Harryson), all which premises
are of the clear yearly value of £12 6s. 8d.; to have and to
hold to the said Sir Thomas Cawarden, his heirs and assigns for
ever, in socage as of the honour of Westminster by fealty only
and not in chief; paying yearly to the Court of Augmentations
for the chapel and churchyard, 12d.; for the almeshouse, 4s. 8d.,
and 19s. for the other premises (the rents are given separately
for each). 21st January; Westminster.</p>
<div class='c020'>Pat. Roll, 3 Ed. VI, pt. 10.</div>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_46'>46</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Augmentation Office. Miscellaneous Books. No. 259.</span></h3>
</div>
<div class='nf-center-c0'>
<div class='nf-center c000'>
<div><i>Book of payments from 20th March, 4 Edward VI, to 20th March, 5 Edward VI.</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='c006'></div>
<div class='sidenote'>1551-52.</div>
<p class='c008'>“Pencions out of Monasteries”</p>
<p class='c008'>f. 16 d. <span class='sc'>Roundesivall.</span></p>
<p class='c008'>Alloc’. Gardiani ibidem per annum vj li. xiij s. iiij d.<a id='r21' /><a href='#f21' class='c016'><sup>[21]</sup></a>
ex<sup>r</sup>.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f21'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r21'>21</a>. </span>The above sum is written below <i>viij</i> <i>li</i>, crossed out.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c024'>Paide to them the xij of Aprill for theire quarters
pencion due at Christenmas laste paste xxxiij s. iiij d.</p>
<p class='c024'>Paide to him the xij of Aprill for theire quarters
pencion due at Th annunciacion last past xxxiij s. iiij d.</p>
<p class='c024'>Paide to them the xxij of Novembre for her
quarters pencion due at Midsomer last past xxxiij s. iiij d.</p>
<p class='c024'>Paide to them the xxij of Novembre for her
quarters pencion due at Mighelmas last past xxxiij s. iiij d.</p>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c006' />
</div>
<div class='nf-center-c0'>
<div class='nf-center c001'>
<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_49'>49</span><span class='xlarge'>ELEANOR OF CASTILE</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c001' />
</div>
<div class='figcenter id003'>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_52'>52</span>
<img src='images/i051.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 12.</span><br />The Effigy of Queen Eleanor in Westminster Abbey; made by William Torel (anno 1291): from the drawing by Basire; Gough, “Sepulchral Monuments of Great Britain,” i, part i, plate xxiii.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c006' />
</div>
<div class='chapter'>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_53'>53</span>
<h2 class='c025'>ELEANOR OF CASTILE,<br /> <br />QUEEN OF ENGLAND<br /><span class='small'>AND THE</span><br />MONUMENTS ERECTED IN HER MEMORY.</h2>
</div>
<hr class='c013' />
<p class='c015'><span class='sc'>Tradition</span> for over six hundred years has conferred the
title of the “Good Queen Eleanor” on the Consort of Edward I, and does
not fail to repeat the tale of one of the most beautiful episodes in
the domestic annals of the mediæval English court; but the force of
this tradition has, without doubt, been greatly strengthened by the
existence of the remarkable series of monuments erected by King Edward
to perpetuate the memory of the Queen.</p>
<p class='c008'>The story of the “Regina bonæ memoriæ” may be of interest to
those who read these pages, not only because the Cross erected at
Charing was the finest of the memorial crosses, but because the artistic
conception and much of the excellent craftsmanship lavished on these
beautiful monuments had their origin in the district of London specially
associated with the work of Charing Cross Hospital.</p>
<p class='c008'>It will first of all be needful to recall something of the life and
character of a Queen who made so powerful an impression on her
people. That her influence must have been remarkable is sufficiently
indicated by the fact that the crosses partook of the nature of shrines.
They were built on consecrated ground and were intended to claim the
prayers of the wayfarer. This great demand on the devotion of her
people, which might readily have given the impression of being forced
or exaggerated, was clearly held to be entirely fitting.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Coming of Eleanor to England.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The omens at the commencement of Eleanor’s career in England
were by no means favourable, and little indicated the event. At the age
of about nine, Eleanor, a princess of Castile, was married to Edward, the
heir to the English Crown, who had reached the mature age of fifteen
years. The marriage took place in the year 1254, in the ancient
<span class='pageno' id='Page_54'>54</span>city of Burgos, and was celebrated with the utmost pomp; but the
magnificence of the occasion fails to conceal the features of the hard
diplomatic bargain driven between Henry III, the father of the bridegroom,
and Alfonso X of Leon and Castile, Eleanor’s half-brother. As
a condition of this treaty Alfonso merged all his claims and rights in
Guienne and the South of France in the English Crown; and the
marriage, arranged after much difficulty, placed the seal on this compact,
terminating a long period of petty warfare and intrigue, during which
Alfonso had sought to encourage the Gascons and other Gallic subjects
of Henry against their liege lord.</p>
<p class='c008'>This Spanish marriage was by no means a popular one amongst the
English; and although in the following year, 1255, when Eleanor came
to London, her reception was marked with much circumstance and
great official cordiality, it is clear that the Londoners had no great love
for the Spaniards. Henry had given sufficient reason for the people’s
jealousy of foreigners; his prodigality and many acts of favouritism
already shown to foreign relations of the royal house and their retainers
gave good earnest that a similar outburst of extravagance on the part
of the King would result from this Spanish invasion. Preceding the
arrival of Eleanor, an embassy led by her brother, Don Sancho, the
young Archbishop of Toledo, had arrived to make certain preliminary
arrangements. They had been greeted with only a modified degree of
favour by the London populace. Their manners were considered to
be anything but up to the London standard. Under an aspect of
richness and profusion their habits were considered to be sordid and
mean; one of the complaints made by the grumbling Londoners was
that the Spaniards, not content with hanging the walls of their lodging
with tapestry, must also use tapestry for covering the floors! The unfortunate
young Prelate himself on riding through the streets of London
had ventured to confer his benediction on the populace with upraised
hand—an act which was interpreted with but little generosity. The
hapless ten years old Princess and wife presents a pathetic picture, for
in the midst of all this political intrigue even the little maiden herself
did not escape the animadversions of her future people. Special notice
is taken of the fact that though landing with a great retinue at Dover,
and with much bravery of outward attire, she had but a very scanty
wardrobe (<i>minus bene munita hernesio</i>). One of the first disbursements
on the part of Henry for his daughter-in-law was to remedy this
grave defect.<a id='r22' /><a href='#f22' class='c016'><sup>[22]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f22'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r22'>22</a>. </span>Rot. Lit. Claus., 39 Henry III, m. 2. (No. 69).</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_55'>55</span>The young Prince, her husband, appears to have been a headstrong
and undisciplined young man; though nominally in possession of great
estates in France and England, his actual income in money was small,
and he and his friends and retainers seem to have lived on the land as if
they were a band of foreign robbers. Edward’s thoughtlessness and the
harshness and cruelty of those around him are unfavourably commented
on at this time. The hard discipline, which the young Prince received
in the years immediately following, was very necessary to render him
the great king of England which he subsequently became, and many
years also were required before the little Princess acquired the gracious
firmness of character which is recognized in the “Regina bonæ
memoriæ” of English history.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Early Influences affecting Eleanor’s Character.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The young Princess did not stay long in England at this time. She
returned to the Continent, no doubt to continue her education under the
influence of her royal relatives in Spain and France. Her half-brother,
Alfonso, was a man of much ability and high culture. His astronomical
researches are known to this day, and he is distinguished by the title of
“El Sabio” among the early Kings of Spain. Eleanor’s education was,
therefore, carried on under conditions more favourable than might be
expected in such a troubled age. The influences thus exerted on her
developing character left their mark throughout her life, and more than
once her love of beautiful things and the encouragement she gave to
learning appear in the fragmentary records of her history.</p>
<p class='c008'>Edward, on the other hand, probably gained little in the way of
discipline or of military or political training from his father. It was in
the merciless school of rebellion and civil strife that he was to receive
his first hard lessons, the results of which may be traced throughout
his career. His early association with Simon de Montfort, a leader of
much genius, afforded him his first training in warfare. This training
never stood him in better stead than when, after his final rupture with
this great leader, the battle of Evesham gave him the opportunity of
putting in practice what he had learned against his old master. At the
same time his experience of the meaner side of the miserable politics of
this period produced the distortion of Edward’s character which marred
many of his great actions in the future.</p>
<p class='c008'>It was not till the Barons’ Wars were approaching their termination
that Eleanor definitely took up her residence in England. The domestic
<span class='pageno' id='Page_56'>56</span>life of the young Prince and Princess may be reckoned as commencing
about the year 1264, ten years after their marriage, when their eldest
child, named after her mother, was born. Eleanor seems to have lived
a very domesticated life,<a id='r23' /><a href='#f23' class='c016'><sup>[23]</sup></a> principally at Windsor and in her Castle at
Guildford, and there is evidence that her gracious character and many
acts of kindness to the neighbouring people soon began to have their
inevitable effect. She showed early the desire to accompany her
husband on his travels, one of the most characteristic features of her
later life. Edward, on the other hand, was still under the shadow of his
father. The state of English politics was exceedingly perturbed, and
the King’s eldest son was much involved in the intrigues of the time.
The strength of Edward’s character frequently showed itself by courage
and enterprise in the field of battle, by political insight and evidences of
good statesmanship; but his impetuosity and his lack of consideration
led to frequent acts of harshness which must have alienated many who
would otherwise have been supporters of the royal house, and his
conduct in private must have frequently been a cause of anxiety and
mental distress to his young Princess.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f23'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r23'>23</a>. </span>Eleanor did not escape experience of the alarms of war,
even at this early age, as may be inferred from the sudden orders for
the retirement of the Princess and her household from Windsor to
Westminster after the battle of Lewes. (Foedera i, part ii, p. 563.)</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Eleanor journeys to the Holy Land with Edward.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>There must have been, therefore, a great sense of relief to many
within the land when, in the year 1270, Edward, having taken the
Cross, entrusted his children and all his possessions to his uncle Richard
and departed to join the French King on crusade to the Holy Land.
The dangers from pestilence and sword besetting such expeditions to the
East were perfectly well understood—repeated and painful experience
had brought them home to all, both of high and of low degree. With
this full knowledge Eleanor made the momentous decision to accompany
her husband and to share the trials and dangers of the crusade.</p>
<p class='c008'>Before they had actually left France on their journey to the East,
intelligence was received of the death of Louis of France, the leader of
this crusade, in Tunis, and although it must have been clear to Edward
that the chance of a successful issue of the crusade was much
diminished, nevertheless, accompanied by his comparatively small
English force, he went on towards Palestine.</p>
<p class='c008'>The next two years were spent in the East. The crusade ended in
failure, scarcely relieved by the exploits of Edward in raising the siege of
<span class='pageno' id='Page_57'>57</span>Acre, at the battle of Nazareth, and in one or two smaller engagements.
From among the incidents of the crusade, the attempted assassination of
Edward by an emissary of one of the Sultan’s emirs stands out most
clearly. During the struggle Edward was badly wounded in his arm.
The wound suppurated, the arm swelled, and threatened to become
gangrenous. At this juncture the physician in the household of the
Master of the Temple was called in to advise, and stated his opinion that
the only chance of recovery was by means of free incision of the affected
arm. Edward decided that this should be done. On hearing the
decision of her husband, the Princess, worn out with anxiety, broke
down completely, and had to be conveyed from the tent in charge of her
brother-in-law, Edmund, and John De Vescy.<a id='r24' /><a href='#f24' class='c016'><sup>[24]</sup></a> The operation was then
performed, and Edward made a satisfactory recovery. During his
convalescence, he must have owed much to the devoted care of his wife
and to the skill of his medical attendants. It was during these three
years of close association, while Edward had to bear the trial of repeated
disappointments in addition to the severe hardships and imminent perils
of foreign warfare, that a bond of firm comradeship was formed between
the future King and Queen.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f24'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r24'>24</a>. </span>Hemingford, Walter: Historiae Angliae Scriptores. Gale; ii, p. 591,
Oxford, 1687. Hemingburgh, Walterus de: Hamilton, H. C., Eng. Hist.
Soc., ii, p. 335.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>Eleanor had three children before leaving England, and during her
years of travel in the East and in France, two, if not three, more had been
born; of these, Joan of Acre, of romantic memory, and a son Alphonso,
for some years heir to the English crown, survived. It can hardly be a
matter of doubt that the number of her children added to the hardships
of her long journeys, and the almost certain incidence of disease had an
adverse influence on the health of the future Queen.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Return to England.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>On their return journey, while resting in Sicily, the Prince and
Princess received the intelligence of the deaths first of their eldest son
John, and then of King Henry. Their homeward journey was, however,
still greatly delayed; Edward running the fantastic risks of a knight-errant
in Burgundy, and becoming embroiled in bouts of partisan warfare
in the South of France, while the Queen visited her royal relatives
in Spain, and rested for some time at Bayonne, where her son Alphonso
was born.</p>
<p class='c008'>It was not till late in the following year that they returned to
<span class='pageno' id='Page_58'>58</span>England, when both Edward and Eleanor were hallowed and crowned
at Westminster amidst surroundings of the greatest magnificence, and
with the promise of a fortunate reign, especially in their relationship
with the King of Scotland (19th August, 1273).</p>
<p class='c008'>One of the first great designs of Edward’s statesmanship was to secure
the more complete subjection of Wales to the English crown. Eleanor’s
influence appears to have been exerted to moderate the impetuosity and
harshness of her husband, and to add the occasional touch of graciousness
which became notably absent when her guiding hand was removed.
Llewelyn II, the Prince of Wales, had been in close terms of intimacy
with the de Montfort family, and was betrothed to Eleanor, the King’s
cousin and only daughter of the great Earl Simon. On her way to
Wales from France in 1276, the ship conveying this lady was captured
by Bristol sailors. The distinguished captive was promptly sent to
Edward at Windsor. Eleanor de Montfort was too valuable a counter
in the game of Edward’s politics to be given up easily, and she was
accordingly kept in captivity in order to influence the negotiations with
the Welsh Prince. The rigour of her captivity, however, was much
alleviated by the action of the Queen, whose kindness and consideration
stands out in pleasant relief to the unremitting harshness of Edward’s
dealings with Llewelyn. The unfortunate Princess, Eleanor de
Montfort, died soon after her marriage, after giving birth to a daughter,
and happily did not witness the savage outburst signalising Edward’s
final triumph over Llewelyn. Accompanied by the Queen, Edward
gradually established himself in Wales. In 1284, Eleanor’s son, Edward,
was born at Carnarvon, and the Welsh once more received a native-born
Prince, but the episode of Eleanor’s kindness to the de Montfort
Princess and her presence with Edward during the later stages of the
occupation of Wales, were no doubt factors of great assistance to Edward
in bringing his Welsh policy to a successful conclusion.</p>
<p class='c008'>The following years of Eleanor’s life seem to have passed in much
contentment in the midst of her numerous family. She still retained
her custom of accompanying her husband on his travels, and undertook
in his company another long voyage to France and probably to Spain.
The memory of her domestic happiness is recalled by the traditions
which still remain of the gaiety which distinguished the “Maiden Hall”
at Westminster.</p>
<p class='c008'>The Queen, however, did not entirely escape trial and mental anxiety
even in her relationship with her daughters. She keenly felt Edward’s
decision that her daughter, Princess Mary, a girl aged 6, should take the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_59'>59</span>veil and enter the great Benedictine nunnery of Amesbury. Edward
seems to have been forced to this harsh decision by the masterful
influence of the Queen Mother, Eleanor of Provence, who was living in
retirement in this convent. The Princess Mary survived to the year
1332, and saw much of the trouble which subsequently befell the
Royal House.</p>
<p class='c008'>Records remain which show that Edward allowed himself to relax
from the severity of the warrior and the statesman in the domestic
circle. His domestic relaxation seems to have been often of a boisterous
character. There is, for instance, the story of the King being held in
bed by seven of the Queen’s ladies and damosels on the morning of Easter
Monday, 1290, till he paid them the fine of £14 expected on that day.<a id='r25' /><a href='#f25' class='c016'><sup>[25]</sup></a>
On another occasion, in the same year, Matilda of Waltham, stated to be
the King’s laundress, wins a wager from the King by venturing to ride
his horse, when he had gone hunting in Essex. The King recovered
his steed by paying a fine of 40s. to the bold Matilda.<a id='r26' /><a href='#f26' class='c016'><sup>[26]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f25'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r25'>25</a>. </span>Wardrobe Account 18 Edw. I, fol. 45b. Chancery Miscellanea 4/5.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f26'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r26'>26</a>. </span>Wardrobe Account 18 Edw. I, fol. 47b. Chancery Miscellanea 4/5.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Last Year of the Queen’s Life.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The year 1290, however, was to be distinguished by events of far
more serious import than the records of domestic happiness. Edward,
secure in England, had reached, perhaps, the culminating point of a
successful career. His judgment was appealed to and his advice followed
in foreign lands; and the great political design of bringing about the
union of the Scottish and English crowns, so often the dream of
his predecessors, now appeared to promise a successful issue by the
betrothal of Prince Edward to his cousin, Margaret of Norway,<a id='r27' /><a href='#f27' class='c016'><sup>[27]</sup></a> the
grand-daughter of Alexander III, and heiress to the Scottish throne.
Eleanor’s influence must have been willingly exerted to bring about so
happy a solution of the long drawn out Anglo-Scottish dispute.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f27'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r27'>27</a>. </span>The “Maid of Norway” was King Edward’s grand-niece, and
first cousin “once-removed” to the Prince.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>Earlier events of importance in 1290 in Eleanor’s domestic life were
the marriages of her two daughters, Joan of Acre and Margaret. The
celebrations which distinguished the latter event were of so striking a
character that their record remains to this day as an example of the
extreme of mediæval magnificence.</p>
<p class='c008'>Already, however, the tragic events which closed this year were
<span class='pageno' id='Page_60'>60</span>throwing their shadows over the land. The Queen’s health was not as
it should be,<a id='r28' /><a href='#f28' class='c016'><sup>[28]</sup></a> and a rumour rapidly gained credence that Margaret was
dead in Orkney, where she had rested on her voyage from Norway to
Scotland. The question of the succession to the Scottish Crown, with
all its dangerous consequences, was immediately opened up, and it is
clear that Edward promptly came to the conclusion that he must be in
a position to bring about a result favourable to the English interest.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f28'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r28'>28</a>. </span>There is some evidence that a daughter was added to the
Queen’s already large family early in this year.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Journey to Harby and the Queen’s Fatal Illness.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The summer session of Parliament in Westminster was adjourned, but
re-assembled during the autumn, and Edward left London on 21st July,
travelling northwards accompanied as usual by the Queen. By slow
stages they reached Harby<a id='r29' /><a href='#f29' class='c016'><sup>[29]</sup></a> near Lincoln, where the Queen remained
at the house of Richard de Weston, who was no doubt a relative of Sir
John de Weston, a confidential member of her own household. It is
clear that the Queen was unable to bear the fatigues of travelling, and
as the autumn session of Parliament was summoned to meet at King’s
Clipstone, a royal residence in Sherwood Forest, Edward was anxious
that Eleanor should be sufficiently close at hand for him to have full
knowledge of her health. During the month of September he made
short journeys in the districts of the Peak and Sherwood Forest, and
paid a visit to Harby on 11th September. The Clipstone Parliament
occupied his attention during most of October and the early part of
November.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f29'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r29'>29</a>. </span>Previously written “Hardeby,” “Hardby,” &c.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>During the whole of this period the Queen was steadily declining in
health. It is interesting to note one or two indications of the nature of
her long illness. It is on record that a certain Henry de Montepessulano<a id='r30' /><a href='#f30' class='c016'><sup>[30]</sup></a>
received on 18th October the sum of 13s. 4d. on account of syrups and
other medicines purchased for the Queen at Lincoln.<a id='r31' /><a href='#f31' class='c016'><sup>[31]</sup></a> The Queen’s
physician was a certain Magister Leopardus, who is specially mentioned
in the Queen’s will as receiving a legacy of 20 marks. In addition to
the physician attached to her household she seems to have been
attended by some of her own countrymen—the physician to the King
<span class='pageno' id='Page_61'>61</span>of Aragon is especially mentioned. To him the Queen presented a
silver goblet, worth 12-1/2 marks, and Sir Garcia de Ispannia, who was
evidently of the King and Queen’s household, received a certain sum
for a cross given to the Queen.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f30'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r30'>30</a>. </span>The presence of a member of the ancient Medical School of
Montpellier in the Queen’s Household is of much interest.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f31'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r31'>31</a>. </span>Wardrobe Account 18 Edw. I, fol. 13, Chancery Miscellanea 4/5.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The character of the illness is described by a contemporary annalist
as being of a lingering character, associated with low fever.<a id='r32' /><a href='#f32' class='c016'><sup>[32]</sup></a> In
spite of all skill and care the Queen steadily became worse, till at
length the illness must have been recognized as fatal. Another
annalist speaks of the Queen as being stricken with a serious
illness.<a id='r33' /><a href='#f33' class='c016'><sup>[33]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f32'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r32'>32</a>. </span>Wykes, Thomas. Ann. de Oseneia. Annales monastici: Rolls
series, iv, p. 326, “<i>Modicæ febris igniculo contabescens</i>.”</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f33'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r33'>33</a>. </span>Walsingham, Thomas of, quoting William Rishanger, a
contemporary writer: “<i>Regina consors grave infirmatate correpta
quarto idus decembris ex hac vita migravit in villa de Hardeby</i>.”
Historia Anglicana, Rolls edition; anno 1291, pp. 32, 33.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>At the close of the Clipstone Parliament, Edward travelled slowly
towards Harby, arriving there on the 20th November. The gravity of
the Queen’s illness seems scarcely to have been appreciated by the King.
He spent six days on his journey from Clipstone to Harby—a distance
of little more than 20 miles. On his arrival the hopelessness of the
Queen’s condition must have been apparent to him. She died on the
evening of the 28th November.</p>
<p class='c008'>Evidence of the King’s grief and depression is given not only by the
contemporary writers, but by Edward’s actions at the time of the death
of Eleanor and during the subsequent months. The gracious character
of the Queen’s influence on her consort, and the affection she inspired
in her people, is amply testified by the contemporary annalists. Walsingham,
once more quoting his predecessors such as Rishanger, describes
her shortly in the following sentence: “She was in very truth a woman
of pious, gracious, and compassionate disposition, the friend of all
English folk, and as a pillar of the whole realm.”<a id='r34' /><a href='#f34' class='c016'><sup>[34]</sup></a> The important
point of this description is the emphasis laid on the fact that Eleanor
was the friend of her English subjects. This had not been the characteristic
of her predecessors. In the time of Henry III, the foreign
relatives of both the Queen and the King swarmed into England, and
memories of the unjust favours showered upon them still rankled in the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_62'>62</span>minds of the people. An echo of this can still be heard on listening to
the tale of the annalist at Dunstable. He writes from the English point
of view, and is chiefly concerned with describing the benefits received
by his Convent from the King and Queen.<a id='r35' /><a href='#f35' class='c016'><sup>[35]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f34'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r34'>34</a>. </span>“Fuerat nempe mulier pia, modesta, misericors, Anglicorum amatrix
omnium, et velut columna regni totius. Cujus temporibus alienigenæ
Angliam non gravabant, incolæ nullatenus per regales opprimebantur, si
ad aures ejus vel minima querela oppressionis aliqualiter pervenisset.
Tristes ubique, prout dignitatem suæ permittebat, consolabatur, et
discordes ad concordium, quantum potuit, reducebat.”</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f35'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r35'>35</a>. </span>Ann. de Dunstaplia: Annales monastici. Rolls series, iii,
p. 362. Of Eleanor this annalist drily remarks: “Hyspana genere quæ
plura et optima maneria adquisivit.”</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>Edward’s letter conveying information of the Queen’s death to the
Abbot of Cluny still remains, and gives pathetic evidence of his own
sorrow: “Whom while living we cherished dearly, and being dead we
shall not cease to love.”<a id='r36' /><a href='#f36' class='c016'><sup>[36]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f36'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r36'>36</a>. </span>Close Roll, 19 Ed. I, m. 11 d. <span class='fss'>A.D.</span> 1291:
Foedera, i, part ii, p. 743: “De Orando pro Regina.” “Cum itaque,
dictam Consortem nostram <i>quam vivam care dileximus, mortuam non
desinamus amare</i>, ac opus sanctum et salubre, juxta divinæ
scripturæ sententiam, censeatur pro defunctis, ut a peccatorum
solvantur nexibus, exorare.”</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>After the obsequies at Westminster were concluded, the King went
into retirement in the religious house of the “Bons Hommes” at
Ashridge, issuing to pay a visit to his mother and daughter in the
Convent at Amesbury.</p>
<p class='c008'>The Queen’s death marks the crisis of Edward’s career. His kingly
manner and appearance, his renown as a warrior, and his success as a
statesman, combined to make him one of the most prominent personages
in Europe. The political problems of the future might well have been
solved by his firmness and skill had not the distortion of his character,
which dates back to his early years, become more pronounced. Especially
in the management of the Scottish difficulty, his firmness of
purpose contrasts curiously with the meanness and shiftiness of his
administration. These base qualities more than anything else brought
to so unhappy a termination his statesmanlike plans for the union of
England and Scotland. This great political scheme ended with Edward’s
life in the dark scene at Burgh-on-the-Sands, marked by the desire for
savage revenge<a id='r37' /><a href='#f37' class='c016'><sup>[37]</sup></a> only too characteristic of Edward’s worse nature. At
no period of his career did Edward miss the moderating influence of
Eleanor of Castile more than during his quarrel with Scotland.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f37'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r37'>37</a>. </span>This phase of Edward’s character brings to mind the
“demon blood” of his Angevin ancestry. <i>Cf.</i> Norgate, Kate:
“England under Angevin Kings,” i, pp. 143-144; ii, p. 207.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_63'>63</span>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>King Edward’s Plan for the Commemoration of Queen Eleanor.</span></h3>
</div>
<p class='c018'>It is quite clear that Edward must have carefully considered the
most fitting means for the perpetuation of the memory of his consort
during the anxious weeks of Eleanor’s last illness. It would have been
otherwise impossible to put into immediate operation the details of his
great design.</p>
<p class='c008'>The plan which commended itself to the King was that after the
body had been embalmed a funeral procession should be formed, led
by himself and accompanied by the important officers of State, and
should pass through England from Lincoln to London. The itinerary
was so arranged that at the close of each day’s march the cortège should
rest for the night near some important town, or at a religious house of
note. The route thus determined was not the most direct.</p>
<p class='c008'>He spent Advent Sunday, December 2, 1290, in Lincoln, the body
resting at the Priory of St. Catherine, on the southern outskirt of the
city, while the King chose the situation for the first of the tombs under
the great eastern window of Lincoln Minster, and attended the memorial
services in that great Church.</p>
<p class='c008'>Leaving Lincoln on 3rd December, the procession passed through
Grantham, Stamford and Geddington, reaching Northampton on the
9th December; then, by way of Stony Stratford, through Woburn and
Dunstable to St. Albans, which was reached on the 13th December. The
King went thence direct to London, to make due preparation for the
ceremonial entry into the City, while the procession conveying the
remains of Eleanor passed on to Waltham Abbey, in order later to pass
through the length of the City. The procession through the City of
London was of the most solemn character, being led by the King,
accompanied by the important nobles, the officials of the Court, the
prelates and the higher clergy.</p>
<p class='c008'>The night following the departure from Waltham, the body rested
at the western end of Chepe (Cheapside), or perhaps actually in St. Paul’s,
the next night, in the village of Charing, on the confines of Westminster,
and the entombment in the Abbey Church of St. Peter’s took place on
the 17th December.</p>
<p class='c008'>Three tombs were to be erected in memory of the Queen—one in
the Cathedral Church of Lincoln, where the viscera were buried; one
in the Church of the Dominican Friars in London, a religious fraternity
which had early gained the sympathy of the King and Queen. In this
beautiful Church of the Black Friars, built mainly by the munificence of
<span class='pageno' id='Page_64'>64</span>Edward and his consort, the heart of the Queen was to be enshrined
at her own request. The third tomb was erected in the Chapel of
St. Edward the Confessor, where the body is interred. The King determined
that at every station on this route where the Queen’s body rested
for the night a memorial cross should be erected in the most sumptuous
manner possible.</p>
<p class='c008'>The ceremonies which took place at these various stations were
solemnly conducted with the full rites of the Church, and we still have
evidence of what took place at Dunstable and St. Albans. The Dunstable
annalist states that the body rested one night there—probably in
the choir of the Priory Church—and the bier remained in this place
while the Chancellor and the other magnates of the Court selected a
suitable place for the erection of the Cross. The Prior of the Convent
was present at the ceremony, and consecrated the spot by sprinkling
holy water. The Priory received two valuable pieces of embroidery
and more than 40 lb. of wax.<a id='r38' /><a href='#f38' class='c016'><sup>[38]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f38'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r38'>38</a>. </span>This was not the first time that Edward presented gifts
to the Priory at Dunstable, including the valuable embroideries on
cloth of gold of Eastern origin, “<i>scilicet Baudekyns</i>,”
<i>i.e.</i>, cloth of Bagdad, where this gorgeous fabric was
originally made.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>At St. Albans, as was to be expected of the greater house, the ceremonies
must have been conducted with even greater magnificence.
The procession was met as it approached St. Albans by the whole
Convent, “<i>solemniter revestitus in albis et capis</i>,” at the Church of
St. Michael, near the entrance of the town. The body was then conducted
to the Abbey Church and placed before the High Altar. The
whole of that night the Convent was engaged in its divine offices and
holy vigils. There can be no doubt that this progress passing through
so much of the land, accompanied by the King and the great magnates
of the Court, honoured by the most ceremonious rites of Holy Church,
and ending with the great celebration at Westminster, was one of the
most remarkable spectacles ever witnessed in England.</p>
<p class='c008'>The idea of this impressive ceremonial was no doubt suggested to
the mind of Edward by the funeral of his old leader on crusade—Louis
IX of France. After the death of Louis in Tunis, his body was
conveyed to France for entombment. It was carried on men’s shoulders
from Paris to St. Denis, and at the places where the bearers rested on
their journey a cross was subsequently built. It is well known that
Edward held the memory of Louis in great veneration, and was well
aware of these circumstances; no doubt he had seen the crosses in
<span class='pageno' id='Page_65'>65</span>memory of St. Louis while in France and accompanied by the
Queen.</p>
<p class='c008'>Besides arranging for the construction of the tombs and crosses,
Edward made very ample provision for the religious celebrations to be
made in memory of his wife. These were conducted in many places
throughout the land, but the most elaborate was that held annually
up to the time of Henry VIII in Westminster Abbey, on the eve of
St. Andrew’s Day, the 29th November.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>The Builders of the Queen’s Monuments.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>Edward was well aware that he had both the men and the materials
for the accomplishment of this great design. Although the King was
unable to devote much of his time to artistic matters, he could not have
been the son of his father without having a cultivated taste and a
competent knowledge of the arts and crafts of the time. His father,
Henry III, however much he failed as a ruler in an age when the power
of the King was the main factor of good government, was an enthusiastic
lover of art and a patron of artists. It was during the reign of
Henry, and largely owing to his influence, that perhaps the most remarkable
development of Early English architecture took place. His principal
work, to which he gave himself with the utmost devotion, and, indeed,
with little consideration of other and more important duties, was the
rebuilding and decorating of the Abbey Church at Westminster. For
the carrying out of his designs he had gradually fostered a school of
architects, sculptors, painters, and other artists in Westminster unrivalled
in England. This Westminster School of Art not only produced a
great part of the magnificent edifice of the Abbey Church, but was
directly engaged in the construction of many other great churches and
buildings. Its influence, however, was still wider. From it trained and
skilled men travelled throughout Britain, imparting the knowledge of
structure and artistic design, while artists and students came to learn
the Westminster methods from the ends of the land.</p>
<p class='c008'>There is, however, a good deal of evidence to show that Edward inherited
the collecting proclivities of his father, and was encouraged in
this amiable failing by Eleanor. He spent very large sums of money
in buying gold and silver plate, jewellery, carvings and embroideries.
Records remain not only of his own possessions, but of the lavish way in
which he and the Queen presented such works of art to religious houses
which they visited from time to time, and in which they took special
<span class='pageno' id='Page_66'>66</span>interest. An example may be found in the accounts of the Queen’s
executors, where we find that a certain Brother Nicholas received the
sum of £10 for bringing jewels, and, apparently, other works of art,
from Acre to England for the Queen’s service.<a id='r39' /><a href='#f39' class='c016'><sup>[39]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f39'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r39'>39</a>. </span><i>Cf.</i> “Liberationes factae per Executores,” &c.,
<i>Item</i>, fratri Nicholao de Acon, pro cariagio diversarum rerum et
jocalium, ad opus Reginae de Acon usque in Angliam, x li.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>In the year 1290 and for some time before, the King’s master mason
at Westminster was a certain Master Richard Crundale, or, as he was
usually called in the Rolls containing the accounts of Queen Eleanor’s
executors, “Magister Ricardus de Crundale, Cimentarius.” Richard
Crundale was the direct successor of such great architects and builders
as Master Henry of Westminster, Master John of Gloucester, and
Master Robert of Beverley, who had been successively the King’s
architects, and to whom we owe the beautiful designs and the excellent
workmanship of Westminster Abbey. Crundale succeeded Robert of
Beverley, and had apparently been in charge of the work at the Abbey
for about ten years at this date. To him the King entrusted the building
of the cross at Charing, and also the construction of the beautiful
tomb in the Abbey Church, but it can hardly be doubted that it is to him
we owe the suggestion of designs for many of the other crosses, and it is
at any rate clear that the influence of the Westminster School is shown
both in their planning and in the selection of the architects and builders
who carried out the work.</p>
<p class='c008'>The accounts of the executors show that, in addition to the work for
the cross at Charing and the tomb in the Abbey, the statues of the
Queen which found places in all the crosses, and much of the decorative
stone carving, were made at Westminster under the eye of Richard
Crundale.</p>
<p class='c008'>In association with Crundale, there were at work in Westminster two
sculptors (“Imaginatores”) of renown, namely—Alexander of Abingdon,
and William of Ireland; these were the men who carved the statues.
Ralph of Chichester carved much of the decorative stone work. The
painter who decorated the tombs had also a high reputation in his time—Master
Walter of Durham. Master William Torel, a citizen of
London and goldsmith, had the good fortune to be chosen to mould and
cast the metal effigies of the Queen, which found their places on the
tombs at Westminster and Lincoln. His work was carried out in
material of more durable character, and his reputation as an accomplished
craftsman in metal rests firmly on the evidence of one of the
most perfect remaining examples of mediæval art. Another worker in
<span class='pageno' id='Page_67'>67</span>metal, Master Thomas de Leighton, has left evidence of his skill in the
fine iron grille over the Queen’s tomb. The executry accounts tell us
also of the men employed by Crundale to bring the stone and Purbeck
marble from Corfe, Caen, and other places, and the names of others
associated with the works at Westminster are still preserved.</p>
<p class='c008'>The actual cost of the erection of the Cross at Charing is difficult to
tell. The accounts show that large sums were received by Richard
Crundale, amounting to some £700, but this sum no doubt represents
work for other memorials to the Queen, and not alone for those at
Westminster. It is also evident that the executry accounts were not
complete, so that an exact calculation of the cost is no longer possible.<a id='r40' /><a href='#f40' class='c016'><sup>[40]</sup></a>
Unfortunately Richard Crundale died before the completion of the
Queen’s memorials, and was succeeded in 1293 by Roger Crundale,
under whose care the work was completed.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f40'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r40'>40</a>. </span>To obtain some idea of the cost of the memorials, money
at the end of the thirteenth century may be considered to have
possessed thirteen times its present purchasing value.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The cross in the City of London at the west end of Chepe was
entrusted to Michael of Canterbury, a member of the Westminster
School, and subsequently the successor of the Crundales as the King’s
master mason in Westminster. This distinguished architect was engaged
in rebuilding the Chapel of St. Stephen’s at Westminster while working
on the cross at Chepe. Of the exact plan of the “Cheapside” Cross
little or nothing is known, but there can be little doubt that it conformed
in essential details to the plan determined on by Richard Crundale. We
know, however, that Michael of Canterbury undertook the construction
of Chepe Cross for the sum of £300, and the executry accounts show
payments to the extent of £226 13s. 4d. This gives us the closest
indication we can now obtain of the actual money spent in building the
crosses. It is generally recognized that the cross at Charing was the
finest and most elaborate of the series, but Chepe Cross, situated as it
was in the City of London, must have also been a noble example of
artistic work; probably the crosses in country places were on less
magnificent a scale.</p>
<p class='c008'>The cross at Waltham was constructed by Roger Crundale and a
certain Dyminge de Legeri, sometimes called de Reyns. Roger Crundale
was obviously a member of the Westminster School, and there is little
doubt that he was Richard Crundale’s brother. Dyminge de Legeri
may have been a foreigner, but his work was held in high appreciation,
for he not only helped in the construction of Waltham Cross, but was
employed in making the sculptured tomb at Lincoln.</p>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_68'>68</span>The building of the five Midland Eleanor Crosses—namely, at St.
Albans, Dunstable, Woburn, Stony Stratford and Northampton—is of
special interest, inasmuch as the work was entrusted to what seems
to have been the mediæval representative of a firm of architects
and builders in Northampton. The most prominent member of the
firm was a certain Johannes de Bello, or de la Bataille, in whose
name most of the payments are made out, but with him was one
scarcely less important, namely, Simon de Pabeham (Pabenham).
These two builders were also of the Westminster School, and appear
later in connection with works at Westminster itself. At this time,
however, they were working at Northampton as their centre. Nearly
£400 was noted as being paid to John Battle, but we can form little
opinion as to how the money was distributed. The cross at Northampton,
a beautiful example of Battle’s handiwork, still exists.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i067.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 13.</span><br />The Cross at Geddington in the eighteenth century. Published by the<br />Society of Antiquaries: drawn by Schnebbelie, engraved by Basire:<br /><i>Vetusta Monumenta</i>, iii, plate xiv, 1791.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>We know nothing of the architects or builders of the crosses at
Geddington, Stamford, or Grantham. The cross at Geddington remains
the most perfectly preserved example of the whole series. This cross is
remarkable, as it shows a completely different plan from those already
mentioned. Indeed its scheme of construction differs to such an extent
from the others that it is not probable that Crundale had any part in its
design. It is also noteworthy that no mention is made of these
three crosses in the executry accounts. If arrangements for building
them had been made at Westminster, we should have had evidence of it
in the executry rolls. It is probable, therefore, that in the Geddington
Cross, the only one of the three remaining, we see the work of some
other master. The influence of the builders of Lincoln Cathedral may
have made itself felt so far as Geddington, on the border of John Battle’s
territory. It is, however, very tempting to make the suggestion that the
cross at Geddington—possibly also those, long since destroyed, at Stamford
and Grantham—owe their origin to foreign artists. Those places
we may regard as having been in the Queen’s own country. On her
marriage it is specially mentioned that she received in dowry important
possessions in Grantham, Stamford, Tickhill, and the Peak. At the time
of her death we know that there were Spaniards in her household, and it
may be that the very unusual and striking design of Geddington Cross
owes its origin to a Spanish rather than to an English artist.</p>
<p class='c008'>At Lincoln, the rebuilding of the Cathedral had given rise to a local
school of art, influenced no doubt by, but independent of, the greater
school at Westminster. The master builder of this school at the time
was Richard de Stowe, sometimes called “de Gaynisburgh,” evidently a
<span class='pageno' id='Page_71'>71</span>man of local birth and training, whose tombstone is still to be seen in
the cloisters of Lincoln Minster. To him was entrusted the erection of
the cross at Lincoln, but some finer decorative work was done by the
Westminster artists. William of Ireland furnished the statues and the
ornaments so frequently mentioned in the accounts as the “virgæ, capita
et annuli,” and special mention is made of payments to him for their
carriage to Lincoln.</p>
<p class='c008'>The construction of the tomb over the remains of Eleanor in the
Cathedral was entrusted to Dyminge de Legeri, with whom was
especially associated Alexander of Abingdon. This tomb for long supported
a replica of Torel’s effigy of the Queen at Westminster made by
that artist’s own hands.</p>
<p class='c008'>The monument constructed to contain the heart of the Queen in the
Church of the Black Friars in London, must have been elaborately
beautiful. Walter of Durham expended his utmost art in its decoration,
and in addition special effigies of the Queen were placed on this
monument, which were made by Alexander of Abingdon, Dyminge de
Legeri, and William of Suffolk.</p>
<p class='c008'>Richard Crundale’s design for the Memorial Cross consisted of a solid
pillar, surmounted by a cross, following in principle the more ancient
crosses existing throughout the land; but with his greater skill in
construction and more developed artistic feeling the simple column was
surrounded with new architectural features.</p>
<p class='c008'>The area on which the cross stood was covered with stone pavement,
on this pavement a smaller platform, attained by a varying number
of steps, was built, from this platform arose the cross proper. The
architectural decorations surrounding the column were arranged in three
stages. The first stage presented three, six, or eight faces, arranged in
panels; in these panels were carved shields, emblazoned with the Queen’s
heraldic bearings, giving the coats of England, Castile and Leon, and
Ponthieu.<a id='r41' /><a href='#f41' class='c016'><sup>[41]</sup></a> The second stage consisted of a platform for displaying the
statues of the Queen, the number of statues corresponding to the faces
of the cross—three, four, or more, as the case might be. Protecting the
statues was arranged an elaborate system of “tabernacles,” giving to
the passer-by the impression of a shrine. The third stage showed the
continuation of the solid column, probably in most cases surmounted by
a cross. The whole of the monument was ornamented with the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_72'>72</span>decorations characteristic of Early English decorated architecture. The
work was done at the best period of this school, and shows how
beautifully the artistic ideas of the time could be utilised for monumental
purposes.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f41'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r41'>41</a>. </span>For England, three lions passant, guardant; Castile and
Leon, quarterly; for Ponthieu, three bendlets within a bordure.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='chapter'>
<h2 class='c025'>THE ELEANOR MEMORIALS AND THEIR FATE.</h2>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Lincoln.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross at Lincoln was built by Richard de Stowe, who at the
time was the master mason in charge of the work at Lincoln Cathedral.
Stowe received sums on account of his work during the years 1291 to
1293 amounting to £106 13s. 4d.</p>
<p class='c008'>Of Stowe’s design for the cross we have no record, but the presumption
is that it agreed in its main features with the other crosses, for some
of the finer decorative work and statues were sent to the cross from
Westminster. They were entrusted to William of Ireland, the
“Imaginator.” The accounts of this sculptor are specially noted. He
received in all the sum of £23 6s. 8d. for making the statues of the
Queen, the “virgæ, capita et annuli,” and for their carriage from Westminster
to Lincoln. We know that he received the sum of five marks—£3
6s. 8d.—for each statue. The cross stood on Swine Green, opposite
the Gilbertine Priory of St. Catherine, where the Queen’s body rested.
The last traces of the cross at Lincoln have long since disappeared.</p>
<p class='c008'>The tomb in Lincoln Cathedral was erected by Dyminge de Legeri
and Alexander of Abingdon who was under the immediate influence of
Westminster. Note is made of their receiving £18 6s. 8d. on account
of their work at Lincoln, a sum, however, which includes a small amount
to Alexander of Abingdon on account of making statues for the tomb at
Blackfriars. Roger de Crundale was evidently associated with the
work, as he is mentioned as receiving £1 16s. 8d. for marble supplied and
work done at the tomb of the Queen. The most important feature of
the Queen’s tomb, however, was the metal effigy made by William Torel,
which was an exact replica of the effigy on the tomb in Westminster.
The tombs at Westminster and Lincoln were probably similar in design.
The Queen’s tomb occupied a position under the great east window of
the cathedral, but now no relic of it survives.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i069.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 14.</span><br />The Cross at Geddington, from a photograph by the Author, 1908.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c015'>In 1901 a monument in memory of the Queen, copying the original
<span class='pageno' id='Page_75'>75</span>tomb, was placed on the southern side of the retro-choir by the late
Mr. Joseph Ruston. Sufficient information was obtained from drawings
of the original monument by Dugdale and Bishop Sanderson, now in
the possession of the Earl of Winchilsea, to permit of this being done.
This monument, however, could not be placed in the original position on
the north side of the “Angel Choir” as the site had been used for a
recent interment, and the Bishop’s Chair had been erected close to the
site.<a id='r42' /><a href='#f42' class='c016'><sup>[42]</sup></a> No fragments of the original tomb were discovered when this
work was being done.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f42'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r42'>42</a>. </span>From information kindly given by Mrs. J. M. H. MacLeod.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Grantham.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>No information is obtainable of the design, nor of the builder, of the
cross at Grantham. Edmund Torner, writing in 1806, makes the
following note:—</p>
<p class='c019'>“On St. Peter’s Hill near the south entrance into the town stood the
elegant cross erected by Edward I in memory of Eleanor, his Queen.”<a id='r43' /><a href='#f43' class='c016'><sup>[43]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote c000' id='f43'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r43'>43</a>. </span>Torner, Edmund, 1806. Collections for the History of the
Town and Soke of Grantham.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>A note in Camden is as follows:—</p>
<p class='c019'>“Queen Eleanor’s Cross stood before Mr. Hacket’s house, called Peter
Church Hill, where stood a Church dedicated to St. Peter, now demolished.”<a id='r44' /><a href='#f44' class='c016'><sup>[44]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote c000' id='f44'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r44'>44</a>. </span>Britannia. Camden-Gough, ii, p. 360.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The fragments of the cross which survived were destroyed by
Cromwellian soldiery during the Civil War.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Stamford.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>There is no information as to the builder and designer of the cross
at Stamford. Richard Butcher, some time Town Clerk of Stamford, in
a work published in 1717, states as follows:—</p>
<p class='c019'>“Not far from hence upon the North side of the Town near unto York
Highway, and about twelve score from the Town Gate, which is called
Clement Gate, stands an ancient cross of Free Stone of a very curious
Fabrick, having many ancient scutchions of arms insculpted in the
stone about it, as the Arms of Castile Leon quartered, being the
paternal coat of the King of Spain, and divers other hatchments
belonging to that Crown, which envious Time hath so defaced, that only
the Ruins appear to my eye, and therefore not to be described by my
Pen.”<a id='r45' /><a href='#f45' class='c016'><sup>[45]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote c000' id='f45'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r45'>45</a>. </span>Butcher, Richard. London, 1717. “Survey and Antiquity of
the Town of Stamford.”</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_76'>76</span>In Camden’s “Britannia” there is the note:—</p>
<p class='c019'>“Not far from the Town without Clement Gate, stood a fine cross, erected
by Edward I, in memory of his Queen Eleanor, but pulled down by the soldiers
in the Civil War.”<a id='r46' /><a href='#f46' class='c016'><sup>[46]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote c000' id='f46'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r46'>46</a>. </span>Britannia. Camden-Gough, ii, p. 351.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Geddington.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross at Geddington has withstood the ravages of time and has
been disturbed less by restoration than the others. Its design differs
greatly from that of the other remaining crosses, but it is so elegant in
spite of its unusual structure, that it is very unfortunate that we have
now no knowledge of its builders. No mention is made of Geddington
Cross, nor of Stamford, nor Grantham in the Queen’s executry
accounts. These Rolls, however, are not extant later than the year
1294. It is possible, therefore, that these three crosses were built a
year or two later than the others.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i071.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 15.</span><br />The Cross at Northampton in the eighteenth century, subsequent to an unhappy “restoration,” which resulted in a wooden cross being erected on the summit. Published by the Society of Antiquaries: drawn by Schnebbelie, engraved by Basire: <i>Vetusta Monumenta</i>, iii, plate xii, 1791.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The cross stands in the middle of the village, where the main road
from Stamford to Northampton turns in a southerly direction to pass
over the old bridge across the small river Ise. There is here a widening
of the road caused by the junction of a road from the east, allowing
of a clear space, so that the cross is well seen from all sides. The
cross itself rises from a platform led up to by a series of eight steps,
arranged in hexagonal form. It is exceptional in being triangular in
section. The first story consists of three faces, each face being divided
by firm mouldings into four panels. These panels show a beautiful
example of stone carving in various diaper designs. Even now the effect
is rich, but before the outlines had faded, the diaper work must have
shown great firmness and strength. The upper panels of the lower
story present the shields bearing alternately the arms of England, Castile
and Leon quarterly, and Ponthieu, as in the case of the other crosses.
The second story also gives the effect of a triangular outline, the angles
corresponding with the middle of each side of the lower story. At
each angle rises a beautifully moulded pillar which, with similar pillars
from the other sides, support the series of canopies sheltering the three
statues of the Queen. These tabernacles are richly ornamented in
the characteristic style of decoration of the period. The third story
continues the main column of the cross upwards, and consists of a
cluster of pillars ending in decorated finials, repeating the designs of the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_79'>79</span>tabernacle work below. The column may have been originally surmounted
by a cross. Fortunately no attempt has yet been made to
replace the terminal feature. The triangular design of the cross gives a
very curious effect when it is looked at from certain directions. It will
be evident that when seen from a line parallel to one of the faces of the
second story, the whole of the cross presents a lop-sided aspect. Its
symmetry of outline becomes obvious on changing the point of view a
little to one side or the other.</p>
<p class='c008'>Geddington Cross, like the others, suffered not only by exposure to
the elements, but perhaps even more by neglect and wilful damage. It
is mentioned that in ancient times, during the rough sports which were
held on Easter Monday, it was the custom to catch squirrels in the
neighbouring woods and turn them loose in the neighbourhood of the
cross. The little animals naturally took refuge in its crevices and
corners, whereupon the mob attempted to destroy the squirrels by
stoning them, and many a decorated finial and beautiful piece of foliage
must have been shattered on those days.</p>
<p class='c008'>On the south side of the steps leading to the cross is a spring of
water evidently used from time immemorial by the inhabitants. It is
now covered in by a small square-headed stone cistern. This cross
fortunately escaped the ruin which befell so many of the other memorial
crosses during the Civil War. It was restored in 1868, and repairs
were judiciously carried out in 1890.<a id='r47' /><a href='#f47' class='c016'><sup>[47]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f47'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r47'>47</a>. </span><i>Cf.</i> “The Stone Crosses of the County of
Northampton.” Christopher A. Markham. Northampton: Joseph Tebbutt,
1901.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Northampton.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross at Northampton is the only one remaining of the five built
by John Battle and his partners. It occupies a site on the east of the
main road leading south, at a distance of about a mile from the town,
in the parish of Hardingston. The road rises slightly as it leaves the
flat land of the Nene Valley, and on this little elevation the cross was
erected. It was the proximity of the religious house of Cluniac nuns
(S. Maria de Pratis), now Delapré Abbey, which determined the spot
where the funeral procession stopped for the night. This cross stands
quite in the open country, and its fine proportions can be easily seen.
Unfortunately it has suffered much, both at the hands of time, but
especially from the restorer, and much of the original decorative work
<span class='pageno' id='Page_80'>80</span>has disappeared. Its strong, beautiful outlines give the observer a high
idea of John Battle’s skill as a designer.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i072.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 16.</span><br />The Cross at Northampton, from a photograph by the Author, 1908.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The cross is situated on a platform surrounded on all sides by an
ascent of nine steps. From this the cross, which is of octagonal outline,
rises. The lowest story is supported by buttresses at the angles, and
the faces thus formed are divided into two panels by a perpendicular
moulding. Surmounting the panels is a series of decorated gables. The
panels show alternately shields with the arms of England, Castile and
Leon quarterly, and Ponthieu. In addition, every alternate face is
ornamented with an open book.</p>
<p class='c008'>The second story is arranged also to give an octagonal outline, but
consists really of the quadrilateral solid column of the cross, on each
face of which stands the statue of the Queen, about 6 ft. in height,
facing north, south, east and west. Attached to this solid column is a
series of eight open tabernacles, elaborately and beautifully decorated.</p>
<p class='c008'>Above this tabernacle story rises the solid four-sided column of the
cross, panelled and adorned with pointed tabernacle work, reproducing
the designs of the story below. The column originally terminated, in
all probability, in a cross-shaped finial. This no longer exists, the feeble
effort to replace the terminal cross during the restoration of 1713 being
happily removed.</p>
<p class='c008'>The first restoration of the cross of which we have particulars was
in 1713. It was carried out very badly, and certainly in bad taste.
Further repairs were undertaken in 1762, during which the benefactions
of the restorers were duly and pompously notified on the cross itself.
Careful repairs were carried out in 1884, and now the care of the cross
is vested absolutely in the Northampton County Council. In spite of
the destruction due to early restorations, the Northampton cross remains
a remarkable tribute to the skill of the architects and builders of the
period, and a fine example of English decorated work.</p>
<p class='c008'>It is difficult to obtain an idea of the cost of the crosses erected by
Battle. The executry accounts give evidence of a sum of nearly £400
paid to Battle and his partners, but this money was on account of the
five Midland crosses. We know that the accounts are incomplete, so
that the amount spent was no doubt larger than this sum; possibly also
a larger amount may have been spent upon the cross in such an important
position as at Northampton than in certain other places.</p>
<p class='c008'>In addition to the money which passed into the hands of Battle,
considerable sums were paid to William of Ireland and Ralph of
Chichester, who were entrusted with the sculpture of the statues of
<span class='pageno' id='Page_83'>83</span>the Queen, and the finer ornamental work represented by the constantly
recurring item, the “virgæ, capita et annuli.”</p>
<p class='c008'>The building of the cross involved another very important piece of
work at Northampton. The roadway from the town to the Queen’s
cross passes over the flat marshes of the River Nene. Robert Harrison
(Robertus filius Henrici) received £80 for the construction of a causeway
across the marshy land, and certain sums were also expended in laying
the pavement. The necessity for such a “rood-way” is obvious to
anyone who has visited the spot, and the building of the causeway
would have been regarded at the time as a work of piety.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Stony Stratford.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross at Stony Stratford was one of those built by John Battle
and his partners. Ralph of Chichester was the sculptor employed to
do the ornamental work. He is noted as supplying “virgis, capitibus
et annulis.”</p>
<p class='c008'>Dr. Lipscomb, writing in 1847, says:—</p>
<p class='c019'>“The cross here was demolished about 1646, but an old inhabitant,
William Hartley, told Mr. Cole that he remembered part of it remaining at
the western extremity of the town.”<a id='r48' /><a href='#f48' class='c016'><sup>[48]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote c000' id='f48'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r48'>48</a>. </span>Lipscomb, George, M.D. “History and Antiquities of the
County of Bucks.” London: T. and W. Robins. 1847, p. 366.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Woburn.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross was erected by John Battle and his partners, Ralph of
Chichester being employed to make some of the ornamental carving.
The puzzling détour of the procession from Watling Street to Woburn
was no doubt due to the desire of the King to have the advantage of
the religious services of the important Cistercian Abbey at this place.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Dunstable.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross at Dunstable was built by Battle of Northampton and his
partners, part of the sculpture being supplied by Ralph of Chichester.
It stood in the main street of Dunstable, where Watling Street crosses
the Icknield Way. The Church and remains of the Augustinian Priory
of Dunstable are situated a very short distance to the east, along the
Icknield Way. Mention has already been made of the description given
<span class='pageno' id='Page_84'>84</span>by the Dunstable annalist of the arrival of the funeral procession, and
the ceremony of consecration of the site where the “lofty cross” was
subsequently erected. The cross is said to have been demolished by
troops under the Earl of Essex, in 1643. Parts of the foundation of the
cross have been met with during recent alterations in the roadway.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>St. Albans.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross was erected in what became the Market Place of St. Albans
by John Battle and his partners, some of the sculpture being supplied
by Ralph of Chichester. The visit of the procession to St. Albans is
especially noteworthy on account of the record remaining of the elaborate
religious services in the Church of the great Benedictine Abbey
during the night the procession rested there. In 1596 the cross is
described as “verie stately.” There can be no doubt, however, that
already the cross had suffered much damage by the lapse of time, as
well as by neglect. At any rate, scant ceremony was shown to the cross
in later years. It is stated to have been partly destroyed by order of
Parliament in 1643; fragments, however, stood in the market place till
the year 1702. In 1703 an octagonal market house was built on its
site; in 1765 this became a pump house, and in 1872 the present
drinking fountain in the centre of St. Albans was built on the consecrated
site of the “verie stately cross.”</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Waltham.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross at Waltham was constructed by Dyminge de Legeri
(de Reyns) and Roger Crundale. Crundale was a near relative, probably
the brother, of Richard Crundale, the master mason at Westminster,
and was obviously in close touch with the Westminster School.
Dyminge de Legeri, of whom we have little knowledge—his name
suggests a foreign origin—must have been a builder of recognized skill.
It is possible that he may have been specially associated with Waltham
Abbey.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i074.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 17.</span><br />The Cross at Waltham, showing its ruinous condition during the eighteenth century. Published by the Society of Antiquaries; drawn by Schnebbelie, engraved by Basire; <i>Vetusta Monumenta</i>, iii, plate xvi, 1791.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The cross occupies a position on the main road at Waltham, where
a side road branched off leading to the important Augustinian house of
Waltham Abbey. The platform from which the cross arose seems
originally to have had ten steps. As the result of restorations this
number has been diminished to four. From this platform the cross,
which is hexagonal in design, arises. Each side of the lower story is
<span class='pageno' id='Page_87'>87</span>divided into two panels, which show alternately the shields charged with
the arms of England, Castile and Leon quarterly, and Ponthieu. The
panels are surmounted by pointed three-cusped arches supporting a
quatre-foil decoration, and finally a gable-like ornament. The whole
panel is richly decorated, the upper part with diaper work. The second
story, which is separated from the first by a perforated battlement,
consists of a series of open tabernacles in pairs, sheltering three statues
of the Queen. The tabernacles terminated in profusely decorated
triangular gables. The third story, still hexagonal in shape, is
ornamented with tabernacle work, reproducing the designs of the
story below. From this arose the shaft of the cross, which has
been replaced during a recent restoration. Considering the ruinous
state into which Waltham Cross had been allowed to pass in the
beginning of the eighteenth century, it is almost a wonder that so
much of the original structure still remains. The lowest story still
gives a good representation of the original work. The Queen’s
statues remain after having suffered many indignities. Most of the
rest of the cross gives evidence of restoration.</p>
<p class='c008'>In 1720 Dr. Stukeley remarked on its ruinous state, and prevailed
upon the Society of Antiquaries to take steps for its preservation, and
Lord Monson surrounded and strengthened the base of the cross with
new brickwork in 1757. In early days the Four Swan Inn, at the
junction of the road from Waltham Abbey, was the only house of any
importance near, but other houses gradually arose. The cross and its
site apparently belonged to no one, so the houses crowded on the cross,
till at length they actually abutted on its eastern side, destroying much
of its beautiful work and even endangering the solidity of the whole
structure. The prints of the cross in the eighteenth century show the
ruinous condition into which it had fallen.</p>
<p class='c008'>In the beginning of last century a local committee undertook its
restoration, £1,200 being expended at this time. This work was
finished in 1834. In 1893 more complete restoration was carried out,
nearly £1,200 being again expended on the cross.<a id='r49' /><a href='#f49' class='c016'><sup>[49]</sup></a> The Falcon Inn,
which had encroached on the cross so as actually to be in contact, was
set back, and now the roadway surrounds the cross on all sides, allowing
its proportions to be seen, and aiding in its preservation. It is interesting
to compare the sums expended on restoration with the amount
noted as being paid to the original builders. The sum of a little over
<span class='pageno' id='Page_88'>88</span>£90 can be traced into the hands of Dyminge de Legeri and Roger de
Crundale. Alexander the Imaginator aided a little in its construction,
and a good deal of the stone, especially the Caen stone, so much in use
at the time, was conveyed directly from the works at Charing.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f49'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r49'>49</a>. </span>Vide <i>Weekly Telegraph for Waltham Abbey, Cheshunt and
District</i>, Friday, 6th January, 1893.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Chepe.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross in the City of London stood at the west end of Cheapside,
opposite Wood Street. The construction of this cross was entrusted
entirely to a distinguished architect Michael of Canterbury, who at the
same time was engaged in building the Chapel of St. Stephen’s at
Westminster. There is unfortunately no relic of the original design.
In the Guildhall Museum, however, are two broken stone panels, which
formed almost certainly a portion of the Eleanor Cross in Chepe.
These panels show the characteristic heraldic shields emblazoned with
the arms of England and of Leon and Castile. Portions of ornamental
mouldings are also preserved on these panels. It is possible that these
may be relics of the work of Michael of Canterbury, but it is more
probable that they are of later date. In the case of Chepe Cross, we
may gain the best idea of the amount of money spent on individual
crosses. Michael of Canterbury evidently agreed to erect the cross for
£300, and the Queen’s executry accounts give evidence of his receiving
£226 13s. 4d.</p>
<p class='c008'>By the year 1441, the cross “being by length of time decayed,” John
Hatherley, Mayor of London, procured licence of King Henry VI to
“edifie the same in more beautifull manner for the honor of the citie.”
This restoration probably followed the main lines of the original
structure, and was very slow in progress.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i076.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 18.</span><br />The Cross at Waltham, from a photograph by the Author, 1908.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>In the course of time the citizens of London seem to have lost
interest in the cross and its significance, and it is only necessary to refer
to the pages of John Stow, published in 1603, to sympathize with this
worthy’s indignation at the desecration which the cross had suffered
even in his time. It had been partly restored on several occasions
subsequent to the time of John Hatherley, including various re-gildings
and re-burnishings in honour of various important royal functions, but
in the year 1581 “diuers Juries” of the citizens having considered that
it stood in the “highway to the let of carriages,” so much prejudice was
aroused that on the night of 21st June a band of roughs destroyed the
lowest images round the cross. These, however, were images totally
different from those originally on the cross, and included one of the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_91'>91</span>Virgin Mary. In the year 1595, according to Stow, this image “was
againe fastened and repaired, and the yeare next following a new misshapen
son born out of time all naked was laid in her arms.”</p>
<p class='c008'>Later the cross was further desecrated by the addition of an alabaster
image of Diana, which served the noble purpose of a water conduit for
the benefit of the citizens. Attempts were made by certain members of
Queen Elizabeth’s court to bring home to the Mayor and citizens the
desecration of the cross which had been permitted. But shortly after
Christmas, 1600, “the image of Our Lady was again defaced by plucking
off her crown and almost her head, taking from her her naked child
and stabbing her in the breast, &c.”<a id='r50' /><a href='#f50' class='c016'><sup>[50]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f50'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r50'>50</a>. </span>Stow, John. “A Survey of London,” Edition of C. L.
Kingsford, 1908.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The cross by this time could only have presented a remote
resemblance to the original work. The new statues which found a
resting place on it had no reference to its original purpose. During the
religious and political turmoils which followed, the crosses both at Chepe
and Charing formed the subject of numerous political lampoons, which
are interesting as giving some idea of the frenzy of destruction which
possessed the extreme political sects. It can hardly, therefore, have
been considered a matter of regret when the last scene of all was enacted.</p>
<p class='c008'>The cross, mutilated and desecrated beyond recognition, was completely
destroyed on 2nd May, 1643. The Parliament deputed a certain
Robert Harlowe to do this work, who went with a troop of horse and
two companies of foot, and carried it out completely. “At the fall of
the top cross drums beat, trumpets blew, and multitudes of caps were
thrown into the air, and a great shout of people with joy”; so runs a
contemporary account.<a id='r51' /><a href='#f51' class='c016'><sup>[51]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f51'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r51'>51</a>. </span>Walford. “Old and New London,” i, p. 334.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The history of the cross in Chepe is important as giving an indication
of the gradual process of decay which seriously damaged the crosses,
long before the desecrating hands of political fanatics mutilated and
finally destroyed the remaining fragments.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Charing.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>The cross at Charing was the work of Richard de Crundale. He
was responsible for the design of this cross, but his design no doubt
influenced the ideas of the other builders, for we know that much of the
finer work of the other crosses was executed under his observation.
<span class='pageno' id='Page_92'>92</span>Most of the statues of the Queen were carved near Charing, and
many of the ornaments so frequently referred to as the “virgæ, capita
et annuli,” were also made by the Westminster artists. The cross
was built approximately on the plot of ground now occupied by the
statue of Charles I, facing the great thoroughfare now known as
“Charing Cross.”</p>
<p class='c008'>Richard Crundale himself died in 1293, and Roger Crundale came
from Waltham to carry on his work. Nearly £700 can be traced as
being paid to the Crundales for their work at Charing, but this sum
obviously includes work done and materials supplied for other crosses.
The finer materials used in the construction of the crosses, such as Caen
stone, Purbeck stone and marble, seem to have been distributed to the
other crosses by way of Charing. Considerable additional sums of
money are mentioned as being paid to merchants of stone, such as
William Canon, Robert Blunt, and others who brought the stone from
Corfe, and Henry Mauger who supplied stone from Caen. Alexander of
Abingdon, the “Imaginator,” carved the statues of the Queen for
Charing; William of Ireland, also working at Charing, carved the
statues of the Queen which found their way to the crosses built by John
Battle and Richard Stowe; while Ralph of Chichester carved much of
the fine stonework for the crosses.</p>
<p class='c008'>Unfortunately no adequate idea can now be obtained of Charing
Cross. It is admitted, however, to have been the finest of the series;
but it must have been subject to the same vicissitudes as its neighbour
in Chepe, and the sketches which exist, purporting to be Charing Cross,
can only have been obtained from the mutilated structure which survived
to the middle of the seventeenth century. The drawing in the
Crowle Collection of the British Museum, which has been reproduced
by Wilkinson, is one of these. The suggestion of the cross in van
den Wyngaerde’s view of London gives, perhaps, a better idea of its
probable appearance.<a id='r52' /><a href='#f52' class='c016'><sup>[52]</sup></a> John Norden’s account is that of an eye
witness, and tells of its condition about the year 1590. He speaks
of it as “an old weather-beaten monument erected about 1290 by
Edward I. Amongst all the crosses which the King caused to be
built ... Charing Cross was most stately, though now defaced by
antiquity.”<a id='r53' /><a href='#f53' class='c016'><sup>[53]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f52'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r52'>52</a>. </span><i>Vide</i> fig. 1.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f53'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r53'>53</a>. </span>John Norden. MS. Harl. 570 (<i>circ.</i> 1593), quoted by
Lethaby; cf. “Speculum Britanniæ, the first parte,” 1593, p. 45, and
the maps of London.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_93'>93</span>
<img src='images/i078.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic002'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 19.</span><br />The fragments of two panels of the Cross in Chepe, City of London, now in the Guildhall Museum. The panels show the heraldic bearings of England, and of Castile and Leon, with portions of moulding. These relics are probably portions of the Cross as restored by John Hatherley in the fifteenth century. From a drawing by Mr. J. C. Hallinan.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_95'>95</span>Charing Cross suffered many indignities in the Parliamentary period.
After many years of neglect, it was sentenced by Parliament to be taken
down in 1643. An old rhyme mentions the event:—</p>
<div class='lg-container-b c026'>
<div class='linegroup'>
<div class='group'>
<div class='line'>“The Parliament to vote it down</div>
<div class='line in2'>Conceived it very fitting,</div>
<div class='line'>For fear it should fall and kill them all</div>
<div class='line in2'>In the house as they were sitting.</div>
<div class='line'>They were told God wot, it had a plot,</div>
<div class='line in2'>It made them so hard-hearted,</div>
<div class='line'>To give command it should not stand,</div>
<div class='line in2'>But be taken down and carted.”</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>Lilly,<a id='r54' /><a href='#f54' class='c016'><sup>[54]</sup></a> writing in 1715, says that part of the stones were employed in
paving the front of Whitehall, whilst some other stones were made into
knife hafts and other articles which, when polished, looked like marble.</p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f54'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r54'>54</a>. </span>Lilly, “Observations on the Life of King Charles I.”
<i>cf.</i> Edward Walford, “Old and New London,” iii, pp. 123 <i>et
seq.</i></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The cross in the forecourt of the South Eastern Railway station at
Charing Cross was erected from the designs of the late Mr. Edward
Middleton Barry in 1864-1865, and is the result of his own desire to
have the opportunity of reproducing the Eleanor memorial at Charing.
Mr. Barry was a learned as well as a distinguished architect, and visited
Northampton and Waltham Crosses many times before deciding on the
design of the monument he proposed to erect. It is well worthy of
careful study as expressing the ideas formed by a conscientious artist and
student of the appearance of the old cross; especially it shows the desire
to give the idea of the original builders, and to avoid the travesties of
construction which have not infrequently been erected purporting to be
after the fashion of an Eleanor Cross. Unhappily the motive which
renders the crosses at Geddington, Northampton and Waltham so
entirely appropriate, and which adds so much to their interest, cannot be
transferred to the new site.<a id='r55' /><a href='#f55' class='c016'><sup>[55]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f55'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r55'>55</a>. </span>The author is indebted for information respecting Mr. Barry’s cross to
Mr. T. Harrison Myres, of Preston, who was one of Mr. Barry’s pupils
in 1864, and afterwards his confidential clerk.</p>
</div>
</div>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Blackfriars, London.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>It was a custom of the time for devout persons to desire that the
heart should be removed after death, and taken to some peculiarly holy
place. Queen Eleanor had taken special interest in the community
of the Black Friars, and especially in the Church which they had just
<span class='pageno' id='Page_96'>96</span>built in London. By her own special request her heart was to be
taken to this church, and Edward took special pains that a tomb should
be erected worthy of containing this relic.</p>
<p class='c008'>There is little knowledge of the design for this monument. A certain
John le Convers seems to have been a clerk dealing with the payments,
while Adam, a well-known goldsmith of the time, and much in the confidence
of the King and Queen, was asked to make an angel to support the
casket containing the heart. In addition to this figure, which was of
metal and gilt as were Torel’s great effigies, statues ornamented the
tomb. These were no doubt of the same design as those erected in other
places. They were the work of Alexander the “Imaginator” and
Dyminge de Legeri, and very probably of the same character as those
at Lincoln. Alexander also constructed certain iron work around this
monument. William de Suffolk made three small images in metal for
the Blackfriars tomb.</p>
<p class='c008'>One of the most interesting features of the monument were the
paintings by Walter of Durham. This artist received the large sum of
£46 13s. 4d., according to the Queen’s accounts, for his work at
Blackfriars. Part of the stonework, consisting of a <i>crista</i>,
perhaps an ornamented stone canopy, was built by William de Hoo.</p>
<p class='c008'>All traces of the tomb disappeared at the time of the dissolution of
the monasteries. The responsibility for the final act of destruction
seems to rest on the shoulders of the same Sir Thomas Cawarden into
whose clutches there also fell the Church and possessions of St. Mary
Roncevall.</p>
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Westminster.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>On the tomb at Westminster a special amount of care was devoted
by the artists and workmen employed by Edward. The design was that
of a large chest formed by slabs of Purbeck marble, in which was placed
the body, and the top of the chest was arranged to support the bronze-gilt
effigy of the Queen.</p>
<p class='c008'>The tomb itself seems to have been designed by Richard Crundale,
and the work was completed by himself and his brother Roger. Under
their supervision the stone chest was ornamented with the characteristic
decorated carving of the period, and with the shields bearing the arms
which are so prominent on all the Eleanor memorials. Walter of
Durham was employed to decorate the tomb with paintings, while
Thomas de Leighton, a skilful worker in metal, made the iron grille
<span class='pageno' id='Page_98'>98</span>protecting the effigy. The perishable part of the stonework is unfortunately
fast disappearing, and faint shadows only of the paintings may be
observed.</p>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/i080.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
<div class='ic004'>
<p><span class='sc'>Fig. 20.</span><br />The public or “Great” Seal of Queen Eleanor.<br />Size 3-5/8 in. x 2-3/8 in.<br />From the impression in the British Museum.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class='lg-container-b'>
<div class='linegroup'>
<div class='group'>
<div class='line'>Legend:—</div>
<div class='line in2'><i>Obverse</i>, ALIANORA DEI GRACIA REGINA ANGLI(E)</div>
<div class='line in2'><i>Reverse</i>, (ALI)ANORA DEI GRA DNA HYBERNIE DUCISSA ACQUI(T)ANNIE</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c015'><span class='pageno' id='Page_99'>99</span>The chief glory, however, of the tomb still remains, namely, the
great bronze effigy of the Queen, the work of William Torel, goldsmith
and citizen of London. Torel designed and cast not only the effigy at
Westminster, but the replica which reposed on the tomb at Lincoln.
Records remain of enormous quantities of wax and of metal supplied to
Torel for this purpose. The effigies appear to have been cast in one
mould, and the work must have been difficult to execute. After their
completion the bronze castings were gilt, and special reference is made to
the purchase of gold florins for this purpose. These coins appear to have
come from abroad, and were obtained from the merchants of “Luka”
and others. The figure shown is of so noble a design that the wish
arises that it might be regarded as a portrait of the Queen. The
evidence, however, seems to be complete that the effigy represents
Torel’s ideal of a queen’s statue; nevertheless it remains to this day
perhaps the most remarkable example of a statue in metal dating from
the early “decorated” period of English art (fig. 12). Special financial
provision was made for the purpose of the religious services at Queen
Eleanor’s tomb, including gifts of land and money to the Abbey, the
proper employment of which was subsequently the source of much discussion
in the chapter.<a id='r56' /><a href='#f56' class='c016'><sup>[56]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f56'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r56'>56</a>. </span>History of Westminster Abbey, by John Flete: edited by J.
Armitage Robinson, D.D., Cambridge, 1909.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'>The anniversary service in memory of the Queen took place on
November 29, the eve of St. Andrew’s Day, and was continued up to
the time of the dissolution of the Benedictine community.</p>
<p class='c008'>To obtain an idea of the appearance of this monument, it must be
recollected that not only was the tomb itself formed of finely decorated
stonework, but was surrounded with elaborate paintings, while the great
gilt effigy of the Queen was studded with the jewellery and enamels
which Edward gathered from the East and abroad. These he lavished
with the utmost profusion in decorating this, perhaps the principal,
monument to his wife.<a id='r57' /><a href='#f57' class='c016'><sup>[57]</sup></a></p>
<div class='fn'>
<div class='footnote' id='f57'>
<p class='c017'><span class='label'><a href='#r57'>57</a>. </span>This tomb, and its ancient glory have been so well
described that it is not necessary to enter into greater detail in
this place. The reader is advised to go and study so much of it as
remains. In addition to the references given it will be of interest to
read the accounts given by Mrs. Murray Smith, “Westminster Abbey, its
Story and Associations, 1906,” and Dean Stanley’s “Historical
Memorials of Westminster Abbey,” 1869.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c008'><span class='pageno' id='Page_100'>100</span>During the history of the next three hundred years, references are
made to the magnificence of the tomb and of the religious celebrations
in memory of the Queen. A distinguished foreign visitor to the Church
in the fourteenth century describes how “the radiant lights like the glory
of the starry sky exhilarated the souls of the beholders with joyousness.”</p>
<hr class='c027' />
<h3 class='c002'><span class='sc'>Bibliography.</span></h3>
<p class='c018'>Information respecting Eleanor of Castile and her Memorials is widely
scattered. Examination of the references will give an excellent
introduction to the study of the social history of an interesting
period. The attempt to do this cannot be made in this place, but the
following references will indicate the sources from which these notes
are derived, and afford the writer an opportunity of expressing his
great obligation to the work of others on the subject.</p>
<p class='c008'>(1) THE EARLY CHRONICLES, especially—</p>
<p class='c019'><i>Rishanger, William of</i>, at St. Albans; Rolls Series, by H. T. Riley.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Wykes, Thomas</i>, Monk of Osney; Rolls Series, by Luard.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Hemingburgh, Walter of</i>; English Historical Society. H. C. Hamilton.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Dunstable, Annals of</i>; Rolls Series, by Luard.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Walsingham, Thomas of</i>, a St. Albans Monk, writing in the
fifteenth century, quotes the earlier Chronicles in the <i>Historia
Anglicana</i>; Rolls Series, by Riley.</p>
<p class='c018'>(2) General historical information may be referred to in:—</p>
<p class='c019'><i>Rymer</i>, “Fœdera,” Record Edition.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Gough, Henry</i>, “Itinerary of King Edward I.”</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Ramsey, Sir J. H.</i>, “Dawn of the Constitution,” a careful
detailed account of the period.</p>
<p class='c018'>(3) SPECIAL REFERENCES:—</p>
<p class='c019'>“Liberationes factæ per Executores Dominæ Alianoræ Consortis Edwardis Regis
Angliæ primi.”</p>
<p class='c028'>These Rolls have the following reference numbers in the Record Office;—</p>
<p class='c028'>“King’s Exchequer Accounts, 352/27, 353/1, 353/9, 353/19”, and have
been transcribed with a most useful introduction in the volume
entitled “Manners and Household Expenses of England,” presented to the
Roxburghe Club by Beriah Botfield, 1841, edited by T. Hudson Turner. A
photograph showing a specimen of these Rolls may be seen in the
Souvenir of the St. Albans Pageant, 1907.</p>
<p class='c018'>“Vetusta Monumenta.” Plates vii, xii, xiii, xiv, xv, xvi, xvii, and
corresponding letterpress.</p>
<p class='c019'><i>Hunter, Rev. Joseph</i>, “On the Death of Eleanor of Castile,”
“Archæologia,” vol. xxix, page 167, 1842.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Abel, John</i>, “Memorials of Queen Eleanor,” published by the
author, 1864.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Scott, George Gilbert</i>, “Gleanings from Westminster Abbey,”
Oxford and London, 1863.</p>
<p class='c028'><i>Lethaby, W. R.</i>, “Westminster Abbey and the King’s Craftsmen,”
London, 1906, gives much original and suggestive information.</p>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c006' />
</div>
<p class='c008'> </p>
<div class='tnbox'>
<ul class='ul_1 c006'>
<li>Transcriber’s Notes:
<ul class='ul_2'>
<li>Missing or obscured punctuation was silently corrected.
</li>
<li>Typographical errors were silently corrected.
</li>
<li>Inconsistent spelling and hyphenation were made consistent only when a predominant
form was found in this book.
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<p class='c008'> </p>
<div>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 69321 ***</div>
</body>
<!-- created with ppgen.py 3.57c on 2022-11-09 18:18:39 GMT -->
</html>
|
