2°'» S. IX. Junk 30. '60.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



507 



to a believing Christian, natui - al — 1. Unity. 2. 

 Trinity. 3. Incarnation. 4. Ejaculations of sup- 

 plication and praise, poured forth with that un- 

 confounded hope which faith in those mysteries 

 produces. John Williams. 



Arno's Court. 



P.S. — Since writing the above, I have read the 

 replies of F. C. H. and B. H. C. to A. H. W. 

 (p. 407.) As I have entered rather more fully 

 into one portion of the question, I would still be 

 obliged by the insertion of this reply. I am not 

 disposed to agree altogether with B. H. C. in his 

 tracing a close connexion between the " Te 

 Deum " and the Greek " Morning Hymn." Iden- 

 tity of doctrine would produce of itself corre- 

 spondence of sentiment, and possibly even of 

 expressions. As to the passage he quotes, " We 

 praise Thee, &c," it is a literal translation, not 

 of the " Te Deum," but of the " Gloria in ex- 

 celsis" — "Laudamus Te; benedicimus Te ; ado- 

 ramus Te ; glorificamus Te ; gratias agiruus Tibi 

 propter magnarti gloriam Tuam." This proves 

 the connexion of the Hymnus Angelicus with the 

 Greek Liturgy. 



OX SEPULCHRAL EFFIGIES AT KIRBY BELERS 

 AND ASHBY FOLVILLE, CO. LEICESTER. 



(2 ud S. viii. 496. ; ix. 410.) 



I beg to thank your learned correspondent J. 

 G. X. for his courteous reply to my Query, and 

 if I have, as he thinks, " too hastily identified the 

 effigies with the actor and sufferer in the murder" 

 of Sir Roger Beler, which it is not impossible 

 may be the case, I shall be quite ready to ac- 

 knowledge my error, however much I may regret 

 the demolition of the ancient local tradition on the 

 subject. 



I believe, however, that J. G. N., from not 

 having seen the effigies themselves, but merely 

 the engravings of them, has assigned to them a 

 later date than that to which they really belong. 



I will notice J. G. N.'s remarks seriatim : — 



1st. The statement that although Nichols ap- 

 propriates the monument at Kirkby (or, as it is 

 now invariably called, Kirby) Belers to a Roger 

 Beler, there were several Rogers in succession, is 

 perfectly true, the judge having been the grandson 

 of a Roger Beler, and having transmitted the 

 same Christian name to his son. 



The effigies of the knight and his lady (who- 

 ever they may be) now rest on a comparatively 

 modern altar-tomb at the east end of the chantry 

 chapel, for the foundation of which the judge ob- 

 tained a licence, 9 Edward II. ; but from a close 

 examination, on a visit which I made to the church 

 a few years ago, it appeared almost conclusive to 

 my mind, from the corresponding size of the slab 

 on which the figures lie, &c, that the effigies had 



been removed from the sepulchral recess for the 

 founder's tomb in the south wall, now tenantless ; 

 whilst, in addition to the probability that a tomb 

 would be erected to the memory of the founder, 

 one proof to my mind that this represents the 

 judge, and not his son, is, that we know the former 

 was buried at Kirby, whilst the place of sepulture 

 of the latter is not recorded, and there is no other 

 monument of the Beler family in the church. 



2ndly. As to the statement of Nichols (Hist, of 

 Leicestershire, ii. 225.) that Sir Roger Beler at the 

 time of his murder was " then very old" whilst, as 

 J. G. N. asserts, " the effigy, which is engraved 

 in plate xliii. of the same volume, seems to repre- 

 sent a very young man in plate armour, and pro- 

 bably of the time of Edward the Third." 



The engraving here referred to (which I may 

 remark in passing appears to represent the lady 

 as several years older than her husband), although 

 giving a good general idea of the outline of the 

 figures, does not accurately show the details. 

 The sculpture itself, if my recollection serves me, 

 represents neither a very young nor a very old 

 man ; whilst, instead of the armour being entirely 

 of plate, as shown in the engraving, it is of that 

 transition period during which a considerable 

 mixture of chain-mail and plate prevailed, as I 

 find from my notes made on the spot that the 

 knight is represented with the head resting on the 

 tilting-helm, wearing the conical basinet with a 

 camail of mail attached; a hauberk of mail ap- 

 pears below the surcoat or jupon ; the arms and 

 legs are in plate, with gussets of mail at the arm- 

 pits and insteps ; spurs with rowels, and soleretts 

 of moveable laminae on the feet. On the surcoat 

 appears the outline of a lion rampant, which iden- 

 tifies the tomb as that of a Beler, there being no 

 inscription on it. 



Although these details will enable us to assign 

 .an earlier date to the monument than J. G. N. 

 does, on the supposition that plate-armour only is 

 represented, it does not certainly afford evidence 

 sufficiently conclusive to decide authoritatively 

 whether the person represented is Sir Roger 

 Beler the judge, or his son, as similar examples 

 may, I believe, be found on reference to Stot- 

 hard's Monumental Effigies, Bloxam's Monumental 

 Architecture, and other works, early enough in date 

 for the father, and late enough for the son, as but 

 little change appears to have taken place in ar- 

 mour about the period in question. 



It is even possible that the monument may 

 have been erected on the death of the judge's 

 relict to the memory of herself and her murdered 

 husband ; which, if so, would account for the ar- 

 mour represented being somewhat later in date 

 than that used at the period of his death. 



Although the date of the judge's birth is not re- 

 corded, we find that his grandfather was Sheriff 

 of Lincolnshire, 40 Henry III., 1255-6, and the 



