i2 dROSS-LEGGED EFFIGIES IN DORSET. 



I cannot conclude without a few words regarding so-called 

 " restoration," which has been attempted on some of the effigies 

 in the county, needless to say, with disastrous results. I take it, 

 and members of this Society will assuredly agree with me, that 

 these and other monumental effigies possess many qualities of 

 peculiar and unique importance. They are (or were) faithful 

 representations of contemporary costume, giving in regard both 

 to detail and general appearance the precise habits worn by 

 certain persons at certain fixed periods of our history. In all 

 cases we may safely assume that they depict the arms and 

 armour that were in use at the time in which each one of them 

 was executed, and they were wrought either during the lifetime 

 of the persons they commemorate or immediately following 

 their decease. The sculptor, even if he did not work from the 

 actual suit of armour (though in all probability he did), was 

 perfectly familar with the details of construction and the method 

 of wearing what he was fashioning in stone, alabaster, or marble. 

 One might as well expect a modern bricklayer to rebuild the 

 Roman wall at Dorchester as think that a local mason could 

 re-cut the beautiful interlinked mail, of which he knows neither 

 the use nor the construction. If those who have charge of these 

 relics would only realise their extraordinary value, they would 

 see that these stupid and pitiful attempts at "restoration" not 

 only ruins the entire character of the mediaeval work, but renders 

 them practically valueless as reliable contemporary records, and 

 are, in fact, nothing less than wilful mutilations. Of far more 

 value are the fragments, as they left the hands of those who gave 

 them shape, than a retouched complete figure, of which no 

 single detail can be safely accepted as a certain authority for 

 contemporary costume, arms, or armour. 



Since these notes were written three more cross-legged effigies 

 have come to my notice. The most important of these is that 

 of a civilian in Trent Church. This is stated by Mr. Batten to 

 be probably of a son of Roger Wyke, whose effigy has already 

 been described, but this figure is of much earlier date than that 

 of Sir Roger. It is an extremely rare form of effigy representing 



