THE TEMPLE CHURCH.
THE MONUMENTS OF THE CRUSADERS--The tomb and effigy of Sir Geoffrey de
Magnaville, earl of Essex, and constable of the Tower--His life and
death, and famous exploits--Of William Marshall, earl of Pembroke,
Protector of England--Of the Lord de Ross--Of William and Gilbert
Marshall, earls of Pembroke--Of William Plantagenet, fifth son of
Henry the Third--The anxious desire manifested by king Henry the
Third, queen Eleanor, and various persons of rank, to be buried in the
Temple Church.
"The knights are dust,
And their good swords are rust,
Their souls are with the saints, we trust."
The mail-clad monumental effigies reposing side by side on the pavement of
"the Round" of the Temple Church, have been supposed to be monuments of
Knights Templars, but this is not the case. The Templars were always
buried in the habit of their order, and are represented in it on their
tombs. This habit was a long white mantle, as before mentioned, with a red
cross over the left breast; it had a short cape and a hood behind, and
fell down to the feet unconfined by any girdle. In a long mantle of this
description, with the cross of the order carved upon it, is represented
the Knight Templar Brother Jean de Dreux, in the church of St. Yvod de
Braine in France, with this inscription, in letters of gold, carved upon
the monument--F. JEAN LI TEMPLIER FUIS AU COMTE JEAN DE DREUX.[477]
Although not monuments of Knight Templars, yet these interesting
cross-legged effigies have strong claims to our attention upon other
grounds. They appear to have been placed in the Temple Church, to the
memory of a class of men termed "Associates of the Temple," who, though
not actually admitted to the holy vows and habit of the order, were yet
received into a species of spiritual connexion with the Templars,
curiously illustrative of the superstition and credulity of the times.
Many piously-inclined persons of rank and fortune, bred up amid the
pleasures and the luxuries of the world, were anxiously desirous of
participating in the spiritual advantages and blessings believed to be
enjoyed by the holy warriors of the Temple, in respect of the good works
done by the fraternity, but could not bring themselves to submit to the
severe discipline and gloomy life of the regularly-professed brethren. For
the purpose of turning the tendencies and peculiar feelings of such
persons to a good account, the Master and Chapter of the Temple assumed
the power of admitting them into a spiritual association and connexion
with the order, so that, without renouncing their pleasures and giving up
their secular mode of life, they might share in the merit of the good
works performed by the brethren. The mode in which this was frequently
done is displayed to us by the following public authentic document,
extracted by Ducange from the Royal Registry of Provence.
"Be it known to all persons present and to come, that in the year of the
incarnation 1209, in the month of December, I, William D. G., count of
Forcalquier, and son of the deceased Gerald, being inspired with the love
of God, of my own free will, and with hearty desire, dedicate my body and
soul to the Lord, to the most blessed Virgin Mary, and to the house of the
chivalry of the Temple, in manner following. If at any time I determine on
taking the vows of a religious order, I will choose the religion of the
Temple, and none other; but I will not embrace it except in sincerity, of
my own free will, and without constraint. Should I happen to end my days
amid the pleasures of the world, I will be buried in the cemetery of the
house of the Temple. I promise, through love of God, for the repose of my
soul, and the souls of my parents, and of all the dead faithful in Christ,
to give to the aforesaid house of the Temple and to the brethren, at my
decease, my own horse, with two other saddle-horses, all my equipage and
armour complete, as well iron as wood, fit for a knight, and a hundred
marks of silver. Moreover, in acknowledgement of this donation, I promise
to give to the aforesaid house of the Temple and to the brethren, as long
as I lead a secular life, a hundred pennies a year at the feast of the
nativity of our Lord; and all the property of the aforesaid house,
wheresoever situate, I take under my safeguard and protection, and will
defend it in accordance with right and justice against all men.
"This donation I have made in the presence of Brother Peter de Montaigu,
Preceptor of Spain; Brother Peter Cadelli, Preceptor of Provence; and many
other brothers of the order.
"And we, Brother Peter de Montaigu, Master, with the advice and consent of
the other brothers, receive you, the aforesaid Lord William, count of
Fourcalquier, as a benefactor and brother (_in donatum et confratrem_) of
our house, and grant you a bountiful participation in all the good works
that are done in the house of the Temple, both here and beyond sea. Of
this our grant are witnesses, of the brethren of the Temple, Brother
William Cadelli, Preceptor of Provence; Brother Bermond, Preceptor of
Rue; the reverend Brother Chosoardi, Preceptor of Barles; Brother Jordan
de Mison, Preceptor of Embrun; Brother G. de la Tour, Preceptor of the
house of Limaise. Of laymen are witnesses, the lady countess, the mother
of the aforesaid count; Gerald, his brother, &c. &c."[478]
William of Asheby in Lincolnshire was admitted into this species of
spiritual confraternity with the Templars, as appears from the following
grant to the order:
"William of Asheby, to all the barons and vavasors of Lincolnshire, and to
all his friends and neighbours, both French and English, Salvation. Be it
known to all present and to come, that since the knights of the Temple
have received me into confraternity with them, and have taken me under
their care and protection, I the said William have, with the consent of my
Brothers Ingram, Gerard, and Jordan, given and granted to God and the
blessed Mary, and to the aforesaid knights of the Temple, all the residue
of my waste and heath land, over and above what I have confirmed to them
by my previous grant ... &c. &c."[479]
By these curious arrangements with secular persons, the Templars succeeded
in attaching men of rank and influence to their interests, and in
obtaining bountiful alms and donations, both of land and money. It is
probable that the cross-legged monuments in the Temple Church were erected
to the memory of secular warriors who had been admitted amongst the class
of associated brethren of the Temple, and had bequeathed their bodies to
be buried in the Temple cemetery.
During the recent repairs it became necessary to make an extensive
excavation in the Round, and beneath these monumental effigies were found
two enormous stone coffins, together with five leaden coffins curiously
and beautifully ornamented with a device resembling the one observable on
the old tesselated pavement of the church; and an arched vault, which had
been formed in the inner circular foundation, supporting the clustered
columns and the round tower. The leaden coffins had been inclosed in small
vaults, the walls of which had perished. The skeletons within them were
entire and undisturbed; they were enveloped in coarse sackcloth, which
crumbled to dust on being touched. One of these skeletons measured six
feet four inches in length, and another six feet two inches! The large
stone coffins were of immense thickness and weight; they had long
previously been broken open and turned into charnel-houses. In the one
nearest the south window were found three skulls, and a variety of bones,
amongst which were those of some young person. Upon the lid, which was
composed of Purbeck marble, was a large and elegantly-shaped cross,
beautifully sculptured, and in an excellent state of preservation. The
vault constructed in the solid foundations of the pillars of the round
tower, on the north side of the church, contained the remains of a
skeleton wrapped in sackcloth; the skull and the upper part of it were in
a good state of preservation, but the lower extremities had crumbled to
dust.
Neither the number nor the position of the coffins below corresponded with
the figures above, and it is quite clear that these last have been removed
from their original position.
In Camden's Britannia, the first edition of which was published in the
38th of Eliz., A. D. 1586, we are informed that many noblemen lie buried
in the Temple Church, whose effigies are to be seen cross-legged, among
whom were William the father, and William and Gilbert his sons, earls of
Pembroke and marshals of England.[480] Stow, in his Survey of London, the
first edition of which was published A. D. 1598, speaks of them as
follows:
"In the round walk (which is the west part without the quire) there remain
monuments of noblemen there buried, to the number of eleven. _Eight_ of
them are images of armed knights; _five_ lying cross-legged, as men vowed
to the Holy Land against the infidels and unbelieving Jews, the other
three straight-legged. The rest are coped stones, all of gray
marble."[481] A manuscript history of the Temple in the Inner Temple
library, written at the commencement of the reign of Charles the First,
tells us that "the crossed-legged images or portraitures remain in carved
stone in _the middle of the round walke, environed with barres of
iron_."[482] And Dugdale, in his Origines Juridiciales, published 1666,
thus describes them: "Within a spacious _grate of iron in the midst of the
round walk_ under the steeple, do lye _eight_ statues in military habits,
each of them having large and deep shields on their left armes, of which
_five_ are cross-legged. There are also three other gravestones lying
about five inches above the level of the ground, on one of which is a
large escocheon, with a lion rampant graven thereon."[483] Such is the
ancient account of these monuments; now, however, _six_ instead of five
cross-legged statues are to be seen, making _nine_ armed knights, whilst
only _one_ coped gravestone remains. The effigies are no longer inclosed
"within a spacious grate of iron," but are divided into two groups
environed by iron railings, and are placed on either side of the entrance
to the oblong portion of the church.
Whatever change was made in their original position appears to have been
effected at the time that the church was so shamefully disfigured by the
Protestant lawyers, either in the year 1682, when it was "thoroughly
repaired," or in 1695, when "the ornamental screen was set up in it;"
inasmuch, as we are informed by a newspaper, called the Flying Post, of
the date of the 2nd of January, 1696, that Roger Gillingham, Esq.,
treasurer of the Middle Temple, who died on the 29th of December, 1695,
aet. seventy, had the credit of facing the Temple Church with New Portland
stone, and of "_marshalling the Knights Templars in uniform order_."[484]
Stow tells us that "the first of the crossed-legged was William Marshall,
the elder, earl of Pembroke," but the effigy of that nobleman now stands
the second; the additional figure appears to have been placed the first,
and seems to have been brought from the western doorway and laid by the
side of the others.
During the recent restoration of the church, it was necessary to excavate
the earth in every part of the Round, and just beneath the pavement of the
external circular aisle or portico environing the tower, was found a
broken sarcophagus of Purbeck marble, containing a skull and some bones
apparently of very great antiquity; the upper surface of the sarcophagus
was on a level with the ancient pavement; it had no mark or inscription
upon it, and seemed originally to have been decorated with a monumental
effigy.
From two ancient manuscript accounts of the foundation of Walden Abbey,
written by the monks of that great religious house, we learn that Geoffrey
de Magnaville, earl of Essex, the founder of it, being slain by an arrow,
in the year 1144, was taken by the Knights Templars to the Old Temple,
that he was afterwards removed to the cemetery of the New Temple, and that
his body was buried in the portico before the western door of the
church.[485] The sarcophagus lately found in that position is of Purbeck
marble; so also is the first figure on the south side of the Round, whilst
nearly all the others are of common stone. The tablet whereon it rests had
been grooved round the edges and polished; three sides were perfect, but
the fourth had decayed away to the extent of six or seven inches. The
sides of the marble sarcophagus had also been carefully smoothed and
polished. The same thing was not observable amongst the other sarcophagi
and figures. It must, moreover, be mentioned, that the first figure on the
south side had no coffin of any description under it. We may, therefore,
reasonably conclude, that this figure is the monumental effigy of Geoffrey
de Magnaville, earl of Essex. It represents an armed knight with his legs
crossed,[486] in token that he had assumed the cross, and taken a vow to
fight in defence of the christian faith. His body is cased in chain mail,
over which is worn a loose flowing garment confined to the waist by a
girdle, his right arm is placed on his breast, and his left supports a
long shield charged with rays on a diamond ground. On his right side hangs
a ponderous sword of immense length, and his head, which rests on a stone
cushion, is covered with an elegantly-shaped helmet.
Geoffrey de Magnaville, earl of Essex, to whose memory the above monument
appears to have been erected, was one of the most violent of those "barons
bold" who desolated England so fearfully during the reign of king Stephen.
He was the son of that famous soldier, Geoffrey de Magnaville, who fought
so valiantly at the battle of Hastings, and was endowed by the conqueror
with one hundred and eighteen lordships in England. From his father
William de Magnaville, and his mother Magaret, daughter and heiress of the
great Eudo Dapifer, Sir Geoffrey inherited an immense estate in England
and in Normandy. On the accession of king Stephen to the throne, he was
made constable of the Tower, and created earl of Essex, and was sent by
the king to the Isle of Ely to put down a rebellion which had been excited
there by Baldwin de Rivers, and Nigel bishop of Ely.[487]
In A. D. 1136, he founded the great abbey of Walden in Essex, which was
consecrated by the bishops of London, Ely, and Norwich, in the presence of
Sir Geoffrey, the lady Roisia his wife, and all his principal
tenants.[488] For some time after the commencement of the war between
Stephen and the empress Matilda for the succession to the throne, he
remained faithful to the former, but after the fatal result of the bloody
battle of Lincoln, in which king Stephen was taken prisoner, he, in common
with most of the other barons, adhered to the party of Matilda; and that
princess, fully sensible of his great power and commanding influence, left
no means untried to attach him permanently to her interests. She confirmed
him in his post of constable of the Tower; granted him the hereditary
shrievalties of several counties, together with large estates and
possessions both in England and in Normandy, and invested him with
numerous and important privileges.[489] On the flight of the empress,
however, and the discomfiture of her party, king Stephen was released from
prison, and an apparent reconciliation took place between him and his
powerful vassal the earl of Essex, but shortly afterward the king
ventured upon the bold step of seizing and imprisoning the earl and his
father-in-law, Aubrey de Vere, whilst they were unsuspectingly attending
the court at Saint Alban's.
The earl of Essex was compelled to surrender the Tower of London, and
several of his strong castles, as the price of his freedom;[490] but he
was no sooner at liberty, than he collected together his vassals and
adherents, and raised the standard of rebellion. He was joined by crowds
of freebooters and needy adventurers, and soon found himself at the head
of a powerful army. He laid waste the royal domains, pillaged the king's
servants, and subsisted his followers upon plunder. He took and sacked the
town of Cambridge, laid waste the surrounding country, and stormed several
royal castles. He was afterwards compelled to retreat for a brief period
into the fens before a superior force led against him by king Stephen in
person.
The most frightful excesses are said to have been committed by this potent
earl. He sent spies, we are told, to beg from door to door, and discover
where rich men dwelt, that he might seize them at night in their beds,
throw them into dungeons, and compel the payment of a heavy ransom for
their liberty.[491] He got by water to Ramsey, and entering the abbey of
St. Benedict at morning's dawn, surprised the monks asleep in their beds
after the fatigue of nocturnal offices; he turned them out of their
cells, filled the abbey with his soldiers, and made a fort of the church;
he took away all the gold and silver vessels of the altar, the copes and
vestments of the priests and singers ornamented with precious stones, and
all the decorations of the church, and sold them for money to reward his
soldiers.[492] The monkish historians of the period speak with horror of
these sacrilegious excesses.
"He dared," says William, the monk of Newburgh, who lived in the reign of
king Stephen, "to make that celebrated and holy place a robber's cave, and
to turn the sanctuary of the Lord into an abode of the devil. He infested
all the neighbouring provinces with frequent incursions, and at length,
emboldened by constant success, he alarmed and harassed king Stephen
himself by his daring attacks. He thus, indeed, raged madly, and it seemed
as if the Lord slept and cared no longer for human affairs, or rather his
own, that is to say, ecclesiastical affairs, so that the pious labourers
in Christ's vineyard exclaimed, 'Arise, O God, maintain thine own cause
... how long shall the adversary do this dishonour, how long shall the
enemy blaspheme thy name?' But God, willing to make his power known, as
the apostle saith, endured with much 'long-suffering the vessels of wrath
fitted to destruction,' and at last smote his enemies in their hinder
parts. It was discovered indeed, a short time before the destruction of
this impious man, as we have learned from the true relation of many
witnesses, that the walls of the church sweated pure blood,--a terrible
manifestation, as it afterwards appeared, of the enormity of the crime,
and of the speedy judgement of God upon the sinners."[493]
For this sacrilege and impiety Sir Geoffrey was excommunicated, but,
deriding the spiritual thunders, he went and laid siege to the royal
castle at Burwell. After a successful attack which brought him to the foot
of the rampart, he took off his helmet, it being summer-time and the
weather hot, that he might breathe more freely, when a foot soldier
belonging to the garrison shot an arrow from a loophole in the castle
wall, and gave him a slight wound on the head; "which slight wound," says
our worthy monk of Newburgh, "although at first treated with derision,
after a few days destroyed him, so that that most ferocious man, never
having been absolved from the bond of the ecclesiastical curse, went to
hell."[494]
Peter de Langtoft thus speaks of these evil doings of the earl of Essex,
in his curious poetic chronicle.
"The abbay of Rameseie bi nyght he robbed it
The tresore bare aweie with hand thei myght on hit.
Abbot, and prior, and monk, thei did outchace,
Of holy kirke a toure to theft thei mad it place.
Roberd the Marmion, the same wayes did he,
He robbed thorgh treson the kirk of Couentre.
Here now of their schame, what chance befelle,
The story sais the same soth as the gospelle:
Geffrey of Maundeuile to fele wrouh he wouh,[495]
The deuelle gald him his while with an arrowe him slouh.
The gode bishop of Chestre cursed this ilk Geffrey,
The lif out of his estre in cursing went away.
Arnulf his sonne was taken als thefe, and brouht in bond,
Before the kyng forsaken, and exiled out of his lond."[496]
The monks of Walden tell us, that as the earl lay wounded on his sick
couch, and felt the hand of death pressing heavy upon him, he bitterly
repented of his evil deeds, and sought, but in vain, for ecclesiastical
assistance. At last some Knights Templars came to him, and finding him
humble and contrite, praying earnestly to God, and making what
satisfaction he could for his past offences, they put on him the habit of
their religion marked with the red cross. After he had expired, they
carried the dead body with them to the Old Temple at London; but as the
earl had died excommunicated, they durst not give him christian burial in
consecrated ground, and they accordingly soldered him up in lead, and hung
him on a crooked tree in their orchard.[497] Some years afterwards,
through the exertions and at the expense of William, whom the earl had
made prior of Walden Abbey, his absolution was obtained from pope
Alexander the Third, so that his body was permitted to be received amongst
Christians, and the divine offices to be celebrated for him. The prior
accordingly endeavoured to take down the corpse and carry it to Walden;
but the Templars, being informed of his design, buried it in their own
cemetery at the New Temple,[498] in the portico before the western door of
the church.[499]
Pope Alexander, from whom the absolution was obtained, was elected to the
pontifical chair in September, 1159, and died in 1181. It was this pontiff
who, who by the bull _omne datum optimum_, promulgated in the year 1162,
conceded to the Templars the privilege of having their own cemeteries free
from the interference of the regular clergy. The land whereon the convent
of the New Temple was erected, was purchased soon after the publication of
the above bull, and a cemetery was doubtless consecrated there for the
brethren long before the completion of the church. To this cemetery the
body of the earl was removed after the absolution had been obtained, and
when the church was consecrated by the patriarch, (A. D. 1185,) it was
finally buried in the portico before the west door.
The monks of Walden tell us that the above earl of Essex was a religious
man, endowed with many virtues.[500] He was married to the famous Roisia
de Vere, of the family of the earls of Oxford, who in her old age led an
ascetic life, and constructed for herself an extraordinary subterranean
cell or oratory, which was curiously discovered towards the close of the
last century.[501] He had issue by this illustrious lady four sons,
Ernulph, Geoffrey, William, and Robert. Ernulph was exiled as the
accomplice of the father in his evil deeds, and Geoffrey succeeded to the
title and the estates.
The second of the cross-legged figures on the south side, in the Round of
the Temple Church, is the monumental effigy of
WILLIAM MARSHALL, EARL OF PEMBROKE,
Earl Marshall, and Protector of England, during the minority of king Henry
the Third, and one of the greatest of the warriors and statesmen who shine
in English history. Matthew Paris describes his burial in the Temple
Church in the year 1119, and in Camden's time, (A. D. 1586,) the
inscription upon his monument was legible. "In altero horum tumulo," says
Camden, "literis fugientibus legi, _Comes Pembrochiae_, et in latere,
_Miles eram Martis, Mars multos vicerat armis_."[502] Although no longer,
("the first of the cross-legged,") as described by Stow, A. D. 1598, yet
tradition has always, since the days of Roger Gillingham, who moved these
figures, pointed it out as "the monument of the protector," and the lion
rampant, still plainly visible upon the shield, was the armorial bearing
of the Marshalls.
This interesting monumental effigy is carved in a common kind of stone,
called by the masons fire-stone. It represents an armed warrior clothed
from head to foot in chain mail; he is in the act of sheathing a sword
which hangs on his left side; his legs are crossed, and his feet, which
are armed with spurs, rest on a _lion couchant_. Over his armour is worn a
loose garment, confined to the waist by a girdle, and from his left arm
hangs suspended a shield, having a lion rampant engraved thereon. The
greater part of the sword has been broken away and lost, which has given
rise to the supposition that he is sheathing a dagger. The head is
defended by a round helmet, and rests on a stone pillow.
The family of the Marshalls derived their name from the hereditary office
of earl marshall, which they held under the crown.
The above William Marshall was the son and heir of John Marshall, earl of
Strigul, and was the faithful and constant supporter of the royal house of
Plantagenet. When the young prince Henry, eldest son of king Henry the
Second, was on his deathbed at the castle of Martel near Turenne, he gave
to him, as his best friend, his cross to carry to Jerusalem.[503] On the
return of William Marshall from the holy city, he was present at the
coronation of Richard Coeur de Lion, and bore on that occasion the royal
sceptre of gold surmounted by a cross.[504] King Richard the same year
gave him in marriage Isabel de Clare, the only child and heiress of
Richard de Clare, earl of Pembroke, surnamed Strongbow, and granted him
with this illustrious lady the earldom of Pembroke.[505] The year
following (A. D. 1190) he became one of the sureties for the performance
by king Richard of his part of the treaty entered into with the king of
France for the accomplishment of the crusade to the Holy Land, and on the
departure of king Richard for the far East he was appointed by that
monarch one of the council for the government of the kingdom during his
absence.[506]
From the year 1189 to 1205 he was sheriff of Lincolnshire, and was after
that sheriff of Sussex, and held that office during the whole of king
Richard's reign. He attended Coeur de Lion in his expedition to Normandy,
and on the death of that monarch by the hand of Bertram, the
cross-bow-man, before the walls of Castle Chaluz, he was sent over to
England to keep the peace of the kingdom until the arrival of king John.
In conjunction with Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury, he caused the
freemen of England, both of the cities and boroughs, and most of the
earls, barons, and free tenants, to swear fealty to John.[507]
On the arrival of the latter in England he was constituted sheriff of
Gloucestershire and of Sussex, and was shortly afterwards sent into
Normandy at the head of a large body of forces. He commanded in the famous
battle fought A. D. 1202 before the fortress of Mirabel, in which the
unfortunate prince Arthur and his lovely sister Eleanor, "the pearl of
Brittany," were taken prisoners, together with the earl of March, most of
the nobility of Poictou and Anjou, and two hundred French knights, who
were ignominiously put into fetters, and sent away in carts to Normandy.
This battle was followed, as is well known, by the mysterious death of
prince Arthur, who is said to have been murdered by king John himself,
whilst the beautiful Eleanor, nicknamed _La Bret_, who, after the death of
her brother, was the next heiress to the crown of England, was confined in
close custody in Bristol Castle, where she remained a prisoner for life.
At the head of four thousand infantry and three thousand cavalry, the earl
Marshall attempted to relieve the fortress of Chateau Gaillard, which was
besieged by Philip king of France, but failed in consequence of the
non-arrival of seventy flat-bottomed vessels, whose progress up the river
Seine had been retarded by a strong contrary wind.[508] For his fidelity
and services to the crown he was rewarded with numerous manors, lands, and
castles, both in England and in Normandy, with the whole province of
Leinster in Ireland, and he was made governor of the castles of
Caermerden, Cardigan, and Coher.
In the year 1204 he was sent ambassador to Paris, and on his return he
continued to be the constant and faithful attendant of the English
monarch. He was one of the witnesses to the surrender by king John at
Temple Ewell of his crown and kingdom to the pope,[509] and when the
barons' war broke out he was the constant mediator and negotiator between
the king and his rebellious subjects, enjoying the confidence and respect
of both parties. When the armed barons came to the Temple, where king John
resided, to demand the liberties and laws of king Edward, he became surety
for the performance of the king's promise to satisfy their demands. He was
afterwards deputed to inquire what these laws and liberties were, and
after having received at Stamford the written demands of the barons, he
urged the king to satisfy them. Failing in this, he returned to Stamford
to explain the king's denial, and the barons' war then broke out. He
afterwards accompanied king John to the Tower, and when the barons entered
London he was sent to announce the submission of the king to their
desires. Shortly afterwards he attended king John to Runnymede, in company
with Brother Americ, the Master of the Temple, and at the earnest request
of these two exalted personages, king John was at last induced to sign
MAGNA CHARTA.[510]
On the death of that monarch, in the midst of a civil war and a foreign
invasion, he assembled the loyal bishops and barons of the land at
Gloucester, and by his eloquence, talents, and address, secured the throne
for king John's son, the young prince Henry.[511] The greater part of
England was at that time in the possession of prince Louis, the dauphin of
France, who had landed with a French army at Sandwich, and was supported
by the late king's rebellious barons in a claim to the throne. Pembroke
was chosen guardian and protector of the young king and of the kingdom,
and exerted himself with great zeal and success in driving out the French,
and in bringing back the English to their antient allegiance.[512] He
offered pardon in the king's name to the disaffected barons for their past
offences. He confirmed, in the name of the youthful sovereign, MAGNA
CHARTA and the CHARTA FORESTAE; and as the great seal had been lost by king
John, together with all his treasure, in the washes of Lincolnshire, the
deeds of confirmation were sealed with the seal of the earl marshall.[513]
He also extended the benefit of Magna Charta to Ireland, and commanded all
the sheriffs to read it publicly at the county courts, and enforce its
observance in every particular. Having thus exerted himself to remove the
just complaints of the disaffected, he levied a considerable army, and
having left the young king at Bristol, he proceeded to lay siege to the
castle of Mountsorel in Leicestershire, which was in the possession of the
French.
Prince Louis had, in the mean time, despatched an army of twenty thousand
men, officered by six hundred knights, from London against the northern
counties. These mercenaries stormed various strong castles, despoiled the
towns, villages, and religious houses, and laid waste the open country.
The protector concentrated all his forces at Newarke, and on Whit-monday,
A. D. 1217, he marched at their head, accompanied by his eldest son and
the young king, to raise the siege of Lincoln Castle. On arriving at Stow
he halted his army, and leaving the youthful monarch and the royal family
at that place under the protection of a strong guard, he proceeded with
the remainder of his forces to Lincoln. On Saturday in Whitsun week (A. D.
1217) he gained a complete victory over the disaffected English and their
French allies, and gave a deathblow to the hopes and prospects of the
dauphin. Four earls, eleven barons, and four hundred knights, were taken
prisoners, besides common soldiers innumerable. The earl of Perch, a
Frenchman, was slain whilst manfully defending himself in a churchyard,
having previously had his horse killed under him. The rebel force lost all
their baggage, provisions, treasure, and the spoil which they had
accumulated from the plunder of the northern provinces, among which were
many valuable gold and silver vessels torn from the churches and the
monasteries.
As soon as the fate of the day was decided, the protector rode back to the
young king at Stow, and was the first to communicate the happy
intelligence of his victory.[514] He then marched upon London, where
prince Louis and his adherents had fortified themselves, and leaving a
corps of observation in the neighbourhood of the metropolis, he proceeded
to take possession of all the eastern counties. Having received
intelligence of the concentration of a French fleet at Calais to make a
descent upon the English coast, he armed the ships of the Cinque Ports,
and, intercepting the French vessels, he gained a brilliant victory over
a much superior naval force of the enemy.[515] By his valour and military
talents he speedily reduced the French prince to the necessity of suing
for peace.[516] On the 11th of September a personal interview took place
between the latter and the protector at Staines near London, and it was
agreed that the prince and all the French forces should immediately
evacuate the country.
Having thus rescued England from the danger of a foreign yoke, and having
established tranquillity throughout the country, and secured the young
king Henry in the peaceable and undisputed possession of the throne, he
died (A. D. 1219) at Caversham, leaving behind him, says Matthew Paris,
such a reputation as few could compare with. His dead body was, in the
first instance, conveyed to the abbey at Reading, where it was received by
the monks in solemn procession. It was placed in the choir of the church,
and high mass was celebrated with vast pomp. On the following day it was
brought to Westminster Abbey, where high mass was again performed; and
from thence it was borne in state to the Temple Church, where it was
solemnly interred on Ascension-day, A. D. 1219.[517] Matthew Paris tells
us that the following epitaph was composed to the memory of the above
distinguished nobleman:--
"Sum quem Saturnum sibi sensit Hibernia, solem
Anglia, Mercurium Normannia, Gallia Martem."
For he was, says he, always the tamer of the mischievous Irish, the honour
and glory of the English, the negotiator of Normandy, in which he
transacted many affairs, and a warlike and invincible soldier in France.
The inscription upon his tomb was, in Camden's time, almost illegible, as
before mentioned, and the only verse that could be read was,
"Miles eram Martis Mars multos vicerat armis."
All the historians of the period speak in the highest terms of the earl of
Pembroke as a warrior[518] and a statesman, and concur in giving him a
noble character. Shakspeare, consequently, in his play of King John,
represents him as the eloquent intercessor in behalf of the unfortunate
prince Arthur.
Surrounded by the nobles, he thus addresses the king on his throne--
"PEMBROKE. I (as one that am the tongue of these,
To sound the purposes of all their hearts,)
Both for myself and them, (but, chief of all,
Your safety, for the which myself and them
Bend their best studies,) heartily request
The enfranchisement of Arthur; whose restraint
Doth move the murmuring lips of discontent
To break into this dangerous argument,--
If, what in rest you have, in right you hold,
Why then your fears, (which, as they say, attend
The steps of wrong,) should move you to mew up
Your tender kinsman, and to choke his days
With barbarous ignorance, and deny his youth
The rich advantage of good exercise?
That the time's enemies may not have this
To grace occasions, let it be our suit
That you have bid us ask his liberty;
Which for our goods we do no further ask,
Than whereupon our weal, on you depending.
Counts it your weal, he have his liberty."
Afterwards, when he is shown the dead body of the unhappy prince, he
exclaims--
"O death, made proud with pure and princely beauty!
The earth had not a hole to hide this deed.
* * * * *
All murders past do stand excused in this:
And this, so sole, and so unmatchable,
Shall give a holiness, a purity,
To the yet unbegotten sin of times,
And prove a deadly bloodshed but a jest,
Exampled by this heinous spectacle."
This illustrious nobleman was a great benefactor to the Templars. He
granted them the advowsons of the churches of Spenes, Castelan-Embyan,
together with eighty acres of land in Eschirmanhir.[519]
By the side of the earl of Pembroke, towards the northern windows of the
Round of the Temple Church, reposes a youthful warrior, clothed in armour
of chain mail; he has a long buckler on his left arm, and his hands are
pressed together in supplication upon his breast. This is the monumental
effigy of Robert Lord de Ros, and is the most elegant and interesting in
appearance of all the cross-legged figures in the Temple Church. The head
is uncovered, and the countenance, which is youthful, has a remarkably
pleasing expression, and is graced with long and flowing locks of curling
hair. On the left side of the figure is a ponderous sword, and the armour
of the legs has a ridge or seam up the front, which is continued over the
knee, and forms a kind of garter below the knee. The feet are trampling on
a lion, and the legs are crossed in token that the warrior was one of
those military enthusiasts who so strangely mingled religion and romance,
"whose exploits form the connecting link between fact and fiction, between
history and the fairy tale." It has generally been thought that this
interesting figure is intended to represent a genuine Knight Templar
clothed in the habit of his order, and the loose garment or surcoat thrown
over the ring-armour, and confined to the waist by a girdle, has been
described as "a flowing mantle with a kind of _cowl_." This supposed cowl
is nothing more than a fold of the chain mail, which has been covered with
a thick coating of paint. The mantle is the common surcoat worn by the
secular warriors of the day, and is not the habit of the Temple. Moreover,
the long curling hair manifests that the warrior whom it represents could
not have been a Templar, as the brethren of the Temple were required to
cut their hair close, and they wore long beards.
In an antient genealogical account of the Ros family,[520] written at the
commencement of the reign of Henry the Eighth, A. D. 1513, two centuries
after the abolition of the order of the Temple, it is stated that Robert
Lord de Ros became a Templar, and was buried at London. The writer must
have been mistakened, as that nobleman remained in possession of his
estates up to the day of his death, and his eldest son, after his decease,
had livery of his lands, and paid his fine to the king in the usual way,
which would not have been the case if the Lord de Ros had entered into the
order of the Temple. He was doubtless an associate or honorary member of
the fraternity, and the circumstance of his being buried in the Temple
Church probably gave rise to the mistake. The shield of his monumental
effigy is charged with three water bougets, the armorial ensigns of his
family, similar to those observable in the north aisle of Westminster
Abbey.
Robert Lord de Ros, in consequence of the death of his father in the
prime of life, succeeded to his estates at the early age of thirteen, and
in the second year of the reign of Richard Coeur de Lion, (A. D. 1190,) he
paid a fine of one thousand marks, (L666, 13_s._ 4_d._,) to the king for
livery of his lands. In the eighth year of the same king, he was charged
with the custody of _Hugh de Chaumont_, an illustrious French prisoner of
war, and was commanded to keep him _safe as his own life_. He, however,
devolved the duty upon his servant, William de Spiney, who, being bribed,
suffered the Frenchman to escape from the Castle of Bonville, in
consequence whereof the Lord de Ros was compelled by king Richard to pay
eight hundred pounds, the ransom of the prisoner, and William de Spiney
was executed.[521]
On the accession of king John to the throne, the Lord de Ros was in high
favour at court, and received by grant from that monarch the barony of his
ancestor, Walter l'Espec. He was sent into Scotland with letters of safe
conduct to the king of Scots, to enable that monarch to proceed to England
to do homage, and during his stay in Scotland he fell in love with
Isabella, the beautiful daughter of the Scottish king, and demanded and
obtained her hand in marriage. He attended her royal father on his journey
into England to do homage to king John, and was present at the interview
between the two monarchs on the hill near Lincoln, when the king of
Scotland swore fealty on the cross of Hubert archbishop of Canterbury, in
the presence of the nobility of both kingdoms, and a vast concourse of
spectators.[522] From his sovereign the Lord de Ros obtained various
privileges and immunities, and in the year 1213 he was made sheriff of
Cumberland. He was at first faithful to king John, but, in common with the
best and bravest of the nobles of the land, he afterwards shook off his
allegiance, raised the standard of rebellion, and was amongst the
foremost of those bold patriots who obtained MAGNA CHARTA. He was chosen
one of the twenty-five conservators of the public liberties, and engaged
to compel John to observe the great charter.[523] he infant prince Henry,
through the influence and persuasions of the earl of Pembroke, the
Protector,[524] and he received from the youthful monarch various marks of
the royal favour. He died in the eleventh year of the reign of the young
king Henry the Third, (A. D. 1227,) and was buried in the Temple
Church.[525]
The above Lord de Ros was a great benefactor to the Templars. He granted
them the manor of Ribstane, and the advowson of the church; the ville of
Walesford, and all his windmills at that place; the ville of Hulsyngore,
with the wood and windmill there; also all his land at Cattall, and
various tenements in Conyngstreate, York.[526]
Weever has evidently misapplied the inscription seen on the antient
monument of Brother Constance Hover, the visitor-general of the order of
the Temple, to the above nobleman.
As regards the remaining monumental effigies in the Temple Church, it
appears utterly impossible at this distance of time to identify them, as
there are no armorial bearings on their shields, or aught that can give us
a clue to their history. There can be no doubt but that two of the figures
are intended to represent William Marshall, junior, and Gilbert Marshall,
both earls of Pembroke, and sons of the Protector. Matthew Paris tells us
that these noblemen were buried by the side of their father in the Temple
Church, and their identification would consequently have been easy but
for the unfortunate removal of the figures from their original situations
by the immortal _Roger Gillingham_.
Next to the Lord de Ros reposes a stern warrior, with both his arms
crossed on his breast. He has a plain wreath around his head, and his
shield, which has no armorial bearings, is slung on his left arm. By the
side of this figure is a coaped stone, which formed the lid of an antient
sarcophagus. The ridges upon it represent a cross, the top of which
terminates in a trefoil, whilst the foot rests on the head of a lamb. From
the middle of the shaft of the cross issue two fleurets or leaves. As the
lamb was the emblem of the order of the Temple, it is probable that the
sarcophagus to which this coaped stone belonged, contained the dead body
either of one of the Masters, or of one of the visitors-general of the
Templars.
Of the figures in the northernmost group of monumental effigies in the
Temple Church, only two are cross-legged. The first figure on the south
side of the row, which is straight-legged, holds a drawn sword in its
right hand pointed towards the ground; the feet are supported by a
leopard, and the cushion under the head is adorned with sculptured foliage
and flowers. The third figure has the sword suspended on the right side,
and the hands are joined in a devotional attitude upon the breast. The
fourth has a spirited appearance. It represents a cross-legged warrior in
the act of drawing a sword, whilst he is at the same time trampling a
dragon under his feet. It is emblematical of the religious soldier
conquering the enemies of the christian church. The next and last
monumental effigy, which likewise has its legs crossed, is similar in
dress and appearance to the others; the right arm reposes on the breast,
and the left hand rests on the sword. These two last figures, which
correspond in character, costume, and appearance, may perhaps be the
monumental effigies of William and Gilbert Marshall, the two sons of the
Protector.
WILLIAM MARSHALL, commonly called THE YOUNGER, was one of the bold and
patriotic barons who compelled king John to sign MAGNA CHARTA. He was
appointed one of the twenty-five conservators of the public liberties, and
was one of the chief leaders and promoters of the barons' war, being a
party to the covenant for holding the city and Tower of London.[527] On
the death of king John, his father the Protector brought him over to the
cause of the young king Henry, the rightful heir to the throne, whom he
served with zeal and fidelity. He was a gallant soldier, and greatly
distinguished himself in a campaign in Wales. He overthrew Prince
Llewellyn in battle with the loss of eight thousand men, and laid waste
the dominions of that prince with fire and sword.[528] For these services
he had scutage of all his tenants in _twenty counties in England_! He was
made governor of the castles of Cardigan and Carmarthen, and received
various marks of royal favour. In the fourteenth year of the reign of king
Henry the Third, he was made captain-general of the king's forces in
Brittany, and, whilst absent in that country, a war broke out in Ireland,
whereupon he was sent to that kingdom with a considerable army to restore
tranquillity. He married Eleanor, the daughter of king John by the
beautiful Isabella of Angouleme, and he was consequently the
brother-in-law of the young king Henry the Third.[529] He died without
issue, A. D. 1231, (15 Hen. III.,) and on the 14th of April he was buried
in the Temple Church at London, by the side of his father the Protector.
He was greatly beloved by king Henry the Third, who attended his funeral,
and Matthew Paris tells us, that when the king saw the dead body covered
with the mournful pall, he heaved a deep sigh, and was greatly
affected.[530]
The manors, castles, estates, and possessions of this powerful nobleman in
England, Wales, Ireland, and Normandy, were immense. He gave extensive
forest lands to the monks of Tinterne in Wales; he founded the monastery
of Friars preachers in Dublin, and to the Templars he gave the church of
Westone with all its appurtenances, and granted and confirmed to them the
borough of Baudac, the estate of Langenache, with various lands,
windmills, and _villeins_ of the soil.[531]
GILBERT MARSHALL, EARL OF PEMBROKE, brother to the above, and third son of
the Protector, succeeded to the earldom and the vast estates of his
ancestors on the melancholy murder in Ireland of his gallant brother
Richard, "the flower of the chivalry of that time," (A. D. 1234.) The year
after his accession to the title he married Margaret, the daughter of the
king of Scotland, who is described by Matthew Paris as "a most elegant
girl,"[532] and received with her a splendid dowry. In the year 1236 he
assumed the cross, and joined the king's brother, the earl of Cornwall, in
the promotion of a Crusade to the Holy Land.
Matthew Paris gives a long account of an absurd quarrel which broke out
between this earl of Pembroke and king Henry the Third, when the latter
was eating his Christmas dinner at Winchester, in the year 1239.[533]
At a great meeting of Crusaders at Northampton, he took a solemn oath upon
the high altar of the church of All Saints to proceed without delay to
Palestine to fight against the enemies of the cross;[534] but his
intentions were frustrated by the hand of death. At a tournament held at
Ware, A. D. 1241, he was thrown from his horse, and died a few hours
afterwards at the monastery at Hertford. His entrails were buried in the
church of the Virgin at that place, but his body was brought up to London,
accompanied by all his family, and was interred in the Temple Church by
the side of his father and eldest brother.[535]
The above Gilbert Marshall granted to the Templars the church of Weston,
the borough of Baldok, lands and houses at Roydon, and the wood of
Langnoke.[536]
All the five sons of the elder Marshall, the Protector, died without issue
in the reign of Henry the Third, and the family became extinct. They
followed one another to the grave in regular succession, so that each
attained for a brief period to the dignity of the earldom, and to the
hereditary office of EARL MARSHALL.
Matthew Paris accounts for the melancholy extinction of this noble and
illustrious family in the following manner.
He tells us that the elder Marshall, the Protector, during a campaign in
Ireland, seized the lands of the reverend bishop of Fernes, and kept
possession of them in spite of a sentence of excommunication which was
pronounced against him. After the Protector had gone the way of all flesh,
and had been buried in the Temple Church, the reverend bishop came to
London, and mentioned the circumstance to the king, telling him that the
earl of Pembroke had certainly died excommunicated. The king was much
troubled and alarmed at this intelligence, and besought the bishop to go
to the earl's tomb and absolve him from the bond of excommunication,
promising the bishop that he would endeavour to procure him ample
satisfaction. So anxious, indeed, was king Henry for the safety of the
soul of his quondam guardian, that he accompanied the bishop in person to
the Temple Church; and Matthew Paris declares that the bishop, standing by
the tomb in the presence of the king, and in the hearing of many
bystanders, pronounced these words: "O William, who lyest here interred,
and held fast by the chain of excommunication, if those lands which thou
hast unjustly taken away from my church be rendered back to me by the
king, or by your heir, or by any of your family, and if due satisfaction
be made for the loss and injury I have sustained, I grant you absolution;
but if not, I confirm my previous sentence, so that, enveloped in your
sins, you stand for evermore condemned to hell!"
The restitution was never made, and the indignant bishop pronounced this
further curse, in the words of the Psalmist: "His name shall be rooted out
in one generation, and his sons shall be deprived of the blessing,
INCREASE AND MULTIPLY; some of them shall die a miserable death; their
inheritance shall be scattered; and this thou, O king, shall behold in thy
lifetime, yea, in the days of thy flourishing youth." Matthew Paris dwells
with great solemnity on the remarkable fulfilment of this dreadful
prophecy, and declares that when the oblong portion of the Temple Church
was consecrated, the body of the Protector was found entire, sewed up in
a bull's hide, but in a state of putridity, and disgusting in
appearance.[537]
It will be observed that the dates of the burial of the above nobleman, as
mentioned by Matthew Paris and other authorities, are as follow:--William
Marshall the elder, A. D. 1219; Lord de Ros, A. D. 1227; William Marshall
the younger, A. D. 1231; all before the consecration of the oblong portion
of the church. Gilbert Marshall, on the other hand, was buried A. D. 1241,
the year after that ceremony had taken place. Those, therefore, who
suppose that the monumental effigies of the Marshall originally stood in
the eastern part of the building, are mistaken.
Amongst the many distinguished persons interred in the Temple Church is
WILLIAM PLANTAGENET, the fifth son of Henry the Third, who died A. D.
1256, under age.[538] The greatest desire was manifested by all classes of
persons to be buried in the cemetery of the Templars.
King Henry the Third provided for his own interment in the Temple by a
formal instrument couched in the following pious and reverential terms:--
"To all faithful Christians to whom these presents shall come, Henry by
the grace of God king of England, lord of Ireland, duke of Normandy and
Aquitaine, and count of Anjou, salvation. Be it known to all of you, that
we, being of sound mind and free judgment, and desiring with pious
forethought to extend our regards beyond the passing events of this life,
and to determine the place of our sepulture, have, on account of the love
we bear to the order and to the brethren of the chivalry of the Temple,
given and granted, after this life's journey has drawn to a close, and we
have gone the way of all flesh, our body to God and the blessed Virgin
Mary, and to the house of the chivalry of the Temple at London, to be
there buried, expecting and hoping that through our Lord and Saviour it
will greatly contribute to the salvation of our soul.... We desire that
our body, when we have departed this life, may be carried to the aforesaid
house of the chivalry of the Temple, and be there decently buried as above
mentioned.... As witness the venerable father R., bishop of Hereford, &c.
Given by the hand of the venerable father Edmund, bishop of Chichester,
our chancellor, at Gloucester, the 27th of July, in the nineteenth year of
our reign."[539]
Queen Eleanor also provided in a similar manner for her interment in the
Temple Church, the formal instrument being expressed to be made with the
consent and approbation of her lord, Henry the illustrious king of
England, who had lent a willing ear to her prayers upon the subject.[540]
These sepulchral arrangements, however, were afterwards altered, and the
king by his will directed his body to be buried as follows:--"I will that
my body be buried in the church of the blessed Edward at Westminster,
there being no impediment, having formerly appointed my body to be buried
in the New Temple."[541]