2"iS. IX. Mar. 10. '60.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



175 



goodness, so / thanhe God on the knees of my soul that this 

 monstrous wickedness is discovered : and I beeseecU God 

 all the particularityes may be layed open and the traiter- 

 ous wretches receive their desert. 



" I thanke God all my prisonners are safe. My care 

 hath of late been the more because we have been extra- 

 ordinarily warned by such accydents I told y L. and 

 the night watches ai the severest in any fort in Christen- 

 dom I wish impreservation to your Lordship, 



on whose good the good of his Majesty and the whole 

 estate doth very nerely depend. From the Towar of 

 London this 5 th November, 1605. 



" Humbly at the 



" Commandment of 



f' h. L. 



" W m . Waad. 



" Because I know all the gates of London are kept, I 

 haue brought all the warders into the Tower and set a 

 watch at the posterns and the gate of St. Katherine and 

 at the Landing strands." * 



What were the " accydents" alluded to? 



w. o. w. 



UNAPPROPRIATED EFFIGY IN TEWKESBURY 

 CHURCH. 



In the north wall of Tewkesbury church, upon 

 a raised tomb, lies the effigy of a knight in armour, 

 which has been attributed to Lord Wenlok, who 

 was slain at the battle of Tewkesbury, a 1471. 

 There is, however, every reason to believe that 

 the figure does not represent Lord Wenlok, as 

 will appear from the various notices hereafter 

 recited. Bigland, in his Illustrations of Gloucester- 

 shire, gives an engraving of the tomb, but not well 

 executed ; and there he assigns it to Lord Wen- 

 lok. A very correct representation of it is given 

 by Stothard (Plate 73.), who places it about the 

 time of Edward III. Gougb, in his Sepulchral 

 Monuments (vol. ii. pt. n. p. 2'23.), says, " it is by 

 vulgar tradition called the tomb of Lord Wenlok, 

 but doubtful," but ascribes it to the year 1471. 

 Plates are given of it in his work. The following 

 passage occurs in the Archceologia, xiv. 153., in a 

 paper on the " Tombs in Tewkesbury Church," 

 by the late Samuel Lysons, Esq., F.R.S., relating 

 to this effigy : — 



" Mr. Gough very properly doubts whether the tomb 

 commonly ascribed to Lord Wenlok is so in reality; 

 indeed, as Ihe arms on the surcoat are indisputably not 

 those of Lord Wenlok, we may be pretty sure that it 

 was designed for some other person." 



The figure of the knight- is, as regards the ar- 

 mour, described by the late Sir Samuel Meyrick, 

 in his Critical Enquiry into Antient Armour (vol. ii. 

 pp. 69, 70.), in which he says, that at the approach 

 of i lie close of the reign of Richard II., " we find 

 the armour undergoing a slight change," and then, 

 ibing this monumental effigy, " falsely at- 

 tributed to Lord Wenlok," goes on to observe 

 that : — 



" Gunpovrder-Plot Book," No. 12. 



" The form of the bascinet is a*little more pressed in at 

 bottom; his hauberk is of chain mail, but his eamail, 

 if not of rings hooked into brass wires, is pourpointed. 

 His jupon is made to open a little at the sides, and then 

 fastened by small clasps ; and his brassets and vambraces 

 are covered with silk connected at intervals underneath ; 

 the protection of the bends of the arms by gussets of 

 mail is managed in a curious manner. Over his thighs 

 is pourpointed work ; and his feet, instead of being 

 guarded by solerets, are covered by a kind of stocking, 

 which shows the shape of his toes ; as the jamb extends 

 but just to the instep, perhaps he had footed stirrups 

 when on horseback, and, if so, this is the earliest instance 

 of that contrivance in armour." 



The same erudite author states that the pour- 

 pointed work above alluded to came in in the 

 reign of Henry III., and continued in use till the 

 close of the fourteenth century. It was a species 

 of padded work stitched. The brass effigy of Sir 

 Miles Stapleton, in Ingham Church, Norfolk, 

 about the beginning of the reign of Richard II., 

 has the thighs covered with pourpointed work. 



I have quoted these particulars from Meyrick 

 for the purpose of assisting our inquiries into the 

 probable date of the monumental effigy in ques- 

 tion, and of suggesting that that date would be 

 about the close of the fourteenth century. 



The jupon which is shown upon the figure is 

 charged with the arms, a cheveron between three 

 leopards' faces, very distinctly sculptured ; and to 

 which I draw especial notice, as the charges have 

 been described as a chevron between three Moors' 

 heads, — an error into which Vincent (18. 137.) 

 seems to have fallen in a note in his MS. account 

 of Lord Wenlok as a Knight of the Garter, and 

 stating moreover that his tomb is at Tewkesbury. 

 The arms of Lord Wenlok were argent a cheveron 

 between three Moors' heads sable. His garter 

 plate is not extant, in consequence of his at- 

 tainder. But to return from this digression : 

 the shield, of which only half is visible, is also 

 charged with the same arms that are tipon the 

 jupon. The head rests upon the tilting helmet, 

 upon which the crest, a lion's head, is placed. 

 The feet repose on a lion. It is almost needless 

 to say that no inscription appears. 



In the absence of any clue, except what the 

 arms may give, by which it might be discovered 

 to whose memory this monument was erected, or 

 what may be inferred from the fashion and acci- 

 dents of the armour in connection with the arms 

 I am about to notice, it must still remain conjec- 

 tural whom the effigy represents. In a Roll 

 (Nicolas's Roll) of arms of the time of Edward 

 III. (viz. between 11 & 25 Edw. III. 1337—1351) 

 are mentioned as appertaining to " Monsire de 

 Lughtburg," these arms, Gules a cheveron argent 

 between three leopards' heads or. In copies of 

 some old rolls of arms in Vincent's Collections 

 (164. 94 ; 165. 100 ; 155. 15 b .) in this college the 

 same arms are attributed in the same reign to 

 " Sir de Lugythburgh," and to " John de Leid- 



