A new book in the Bodleian

I spent a considerable part of this morning and afternoon attending an online symposium at the Bodleian Library. It was devoted to a book the Library has recently acquired. Now there is nothing unusual in that - as Bodley’s Librarian pointed out in his opening remarks the Library takes in something like a thousand books every day. This one however is exceptional.

An illuminated manuscript French translation of the New Testament produced to the highest standards of the day in the Parisian ateliers during the last quarter of the thirteenth century it was acquired before 1350 by the future King Jean II, who inscribed his name in it as a sign of ownership. It may have come to England as a result of the King’s captivity after the battle of Poitiers in 1356, or, perhaps more probably, with his granddaughter Queen Joan of Navarre, who married King Henry IV in 1403. The application of ultra-violet light has revealed the erased names of later English owners - Thomas, later Duke of Clarence, his stepson Edmund Beaufort, Count of Mortain and later Duke of Somerset, who then gave it to his stepfather’s youngest brother, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Duke Humphrey - or Humfrey - was, of course, a seminal figure in the development of what became the Bodleian Library, and a significant patron of learning and literature both established Latin and French texts and the latest Italian Humanist versions. The volume appears to have disappeared after Duke.Humfrey’s death in 1447 before reappearing in the eighteenth century. Thanks to a government ban on its export it has now been acquired and given a permanent home in the library its last royal owner so clearly supported and valued.

The symposium offered a series of fascinating talks about the book, which is on show in the Weston Library, and, as of today,  also available in digitised form online at Bodleian Library MS. Duke Humfrey c. 1

The full Bodleian catalogue entry with the various recovered inscriptions can be seen at MS. Duke Humfrey c. 1 - Medieval Manuscripts

The Bodleian website illustrates two of the miniatures and lists the impressive array of contributors to the symposium at From Jean le Bon to Good Duke Humfrey

The book itself and the symposium provide and provided a fascinating insight into the cultivated literary tastes and patronage of princes either side of the Channel between the last years of St Louis and the mid-fifteenth century.

Wikipedia has an illustrated biography of the Duke at Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester

 

Humphrey Duke of Gloucester

Fifteenth century portrait by an unknown artist Library of St Vaast, Arras

Image: Britannica

 

Conflict at Amesbury Priory

 

A short article on the Medievalists.net recounts the troubles that beset the communal life of the nuns of Amesbury in Wiltshire at the turn of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It can be read at The Kidnapping Scandal at Amesbury Priory

Despite its slightly sensationalist style, reminiscent of Coulton the story is intriguing and the article sent me to the detailed Wikipedia account of the history of the foundation at Amesbury Abbey. It also sent me to the comprehensive history in the Victoria County History of Wiltshire vol iii (1956) which can be seen at Houses of Benedictine nuns: Abbey, later priory, of Amesbury

These give more detail about the disturbing events at the monastery in these years and of the troubled times of the Prioress, Sibyl Montague. It is necessary to read all three accounts to begin to assemble a clear picture of the events that are described. That said they all seem to miss out the political context of the events at the time of the Epiphany Rising of 1399-1400 - also also possibly in respect of the calendar regarding Archbishop Arundel who did not return from exile until midsummer 1399.

 

Putting the evidence together it appears as if the former Prior took advantage of the situation when the Prioress had inevitably lost the support of her brother John, third Earl of Salisbury, and closely identified with King Richard II, with his execution at Cirencester in the wake of the failed Epiphany uprising. A high profile monastic house for either men or women was closely enmeshed in the political and social world of its day.

Amesbury, claimed by Malory in the Morte d’Arthur as the place of retirement of Queen Guinevere, enjoyed a high profile as a house of the Fontevrault sisterhood and as the home chosen by, or for, various female members of the Royal house. This gave the monastery prestige, and these ladies appear to have retained their own high status within the convent and Order. A woman of aristocratic birth like Sibyl Montague would doubtless fit in well in such a community. The whole story of the abbey and the later priory is fascinating, and worthy of a full history on its own.

The only evidence above ground today of Amesbury Priory is the parish church. Wikipedia has an account of the building at Church of St Mary and St Melor, Amesbury and the VCH article also discusses the original status of the building. It is certainly not a typical rural parish church, as I realised when I visited it many years ago. On the basis of the physical evidence and the record evidence as well as the observations of antiquarians it looks as if it was the church for the original community of nuns and then after 1177 was assigned to the community of priests and for the use of the parish, and that a new nuns church and claustral buildings were erected to the north, close to the successor country house known as Amesbury Abbey.

Possible portrait of Lady Jane Grey - a postscript

Following on from my recent post about the return to Wrest Park of what has been in the past, and is now once again, being considered to be a contemporary portrait of Lady Jane Grey,

The Art Newspaper has now drawn attention to the fact that thisidentification was being advanced almost twenty years ago in connection with a major the 2007exhibition on portraits of the period.

The article can be seen at Revelation over last surviving portrait of England’s ‘nine day queen’ was made 20 years ago, art historian says

The evidence that the portrait has undergone significant damage and repainting as perceptions changed as to the status of the sitter makes me wonder if the simple white coif was substituted for the more elaborate French hood as an indication of what she wore to her execution.

The Galloway Hoard in context

I have posted several times about the Galloway Hoard, deposited within a long lost timber building about the turn of the ninth and tenth centuries and which was found in Kirkcudbrightshire in 2014

The magazine Discover has an article which draws upon the recent deciferment of the runic inscription on an arm bracelet which identifies the hoard as the property of a community. It then sets out, guided by an expert from the National Museums of Scotland, to offer an interpretation of various aspects of the carefully buried objects and whether the objects were loot concealed by Vikings or if they might be wealth garnered through trade with or by the Vikings in an area whose political allegiance was shifting between different rulers at the time.  

The article can be read at Mystery Solved for the Galloway Hoard Runes of the Viking Era

Skeletons from Stirling Castle

I came upon a new video from the History Hit website about the interpretation of three skeletons found in what appears to be the site of the original chapel in Stirling Castle. They have been carbon dated to the period 1296 to 1357, which puts them in the time of the Scottish War of Independence down to 1328, or the later conflict in the 1330s when King Edward III backed Edward Balliol in his partially successful attempt to gain the Scottish crown against the minority government for King David II. I would imagine the more likely time that these individuals died was in the period up to the siege of Stirling Castle that culminated in the battle of Bannockburn in June 1314. All three skeletons show extensive signs of trauma at the time of death, and this is brought out very well by the expert’s analysis of the bones and the damage they had sustained. 

There may be the possibility from the evidence of slight genetic abnormalities that the three  were related. There is also a case made that they were of sufficient rank or status to be buried within the chapel, and presumably at a time when it was not possible to remove bodies to the nearby parish church or to a family estate.

It will be interesting to see what further  historical DNA testing or scientific tests may reveal about these three individuals or indeed if they can be identified as happened with another skeleton found at Stirling who turned out to be an English commander from the fourteenth century. I do not know if the fragmented nature of the skulls would allow for facial reconstructions.

The video can be seen at Medieval Skeletons Reveal Brutal Final Moments

It makes for some quite gruesome but very interesting watching.

Bbok review: Reassessing ‘Butcher’ Tiptoft

Sir John Tiptoft: 'Butcher of England': Earl of Worcester, Edward IV's Enforcer & Humanist Scholar

Peter Spring. Pen & Sword Military. 2018

A valuable study marred by trivial errors

John Tiptoft Earl of Worcester is famous for two things - as the ‘Butcher of England’ as Constable of the realm and as one of the first English humanists. This book is the first about him in virtually eighty years and bridges the gap between those two not inconsistent aspects of his life.

It is a valuable addition to fifteenth century studies for both the academic and the wider interested public - and it is not about Richard III - whom the author ventures ( brave man ) to see as guilty….

Spring draws attention to much that is new or specialised - the importance of Tiptoft as a government minister in the 1450s and again in the 1460s - his studies in Italy, his apparently Italianesque house at Brassingbourne, and the events in Ireland that surround the execution of the Earl of Desmond in 1468.

A lot of research has gone into this book and it has an excellent bibliography.

Having said all that it seems a little churlish to turn to the limitations of the work. As a book it needed better copy editing - we have Dartmouth for Dartford several times, Lionel of Clarence is said to be the son, not the brother of John of Gaunt, surnames not always consistent, and as with so many books it is awkward in its use of ecclesiastical church terminology - most notably several references to the “coronation” of Archbishops of Canterbury….

At times the style gets too tabloid - words such as “schmooze” and “nincompoop” irritate, as do the use of Brexit analogies which are pushed too far and are too simplistic.

Too often the text is repetitive as to stressing Tiptoft’ importance and abilities.

On the whole I would be very positive. Much in the book is not easily available. There is new material, it is wide ranging, informative, evocative of Tiptoft’s era. It is a rounded view of one man’s life and of his times, its culture in all senses. The analogy it makes with Thomas Cromwell is thought provoking.

Does Peter Spring make Tiptoft human? Yes. Does he make him likeable? Probably not.

Originally posted on Amazon on 3.7.2021

How not to represent the Norman Conquest

My last post was about historical costume based on records from the thirteenth century. Before moving on to other topics, and quite by chance, I came upon a video about historic dress as it is so often misrepresented by film and television makers from the Welsh Viking. Its creator is an archaeologist and a re-enactor of early mediaeval military life. Those of his videos I have seen are well researched and informative.

 

His latest one was inspired by the forthcoming television series.”King and Conqueror” about the events of 1066, and revolves around the two central figures of King Harold II and King William I. Based upon a series of pre-transmission photographs the Welsh Viking proceeded to do one of the most devastating critiques of the costumes assigned to the leading characters. Indeed it was a veritable hatchet job on the production values, worthy of any combatant at Stamford Bridge or Hastings.

The numerous comments from online viewers are entirely supportive of what he is saying about the glaring errors in the costumes and armour of the characters. I certainly felt, had I ever been inclined to watch the series, that it definitely is not worth it.

The video can be seen at The Costuming in "King and Conqueror" Looks Terrible. Like, Really Terrible.

Dressing a thirteenth century Countess of Leicester

Medievalists.net has a short article about the clothing recorded as having been purchased for Eleanor de Montfort, Countrss of Leicester, in 1265, the year which saw the death of her second husband Simon, and their eldest son, Henry, at the battle of Evesham. The youngest child of King John, and hence sister of King Henry III, by birth and marriage she was at the centre of the political disputes which dominated the middle and later years of her brother’s reign.

The article, which has a useful and impressive come on by the mini bibliography as well as links to other articles on medieval women’s attire, can be seen at Inside Eleanor de Montfort’s Lavish Medieval Wardrobe

Wikipedia has a biographical account, with all the appropriate links, of the Countess, at Eleanor of England, Countess of Leicester

John Maddicott’s acclaimed biography of Earl Simon discusses the fact that the Montforts wore russet or similar simple fabrics when at their country estates and castles as, he argues, an aspect of their lifestyle influenced by Franciscan ideals. He also makes the point that Countess Eleanor was still keen on her finery, as per Adam Marsh’s letter. If this choice of simple attire was a conscious choice then it was perhaps rather more than the thirteenth century equivalent of “smart casual” or “dressing down ”, or indeed modern photographs of aristocrats posing in immaculately ironed jeans and tee shirts in the grand rooms of their ancestral homes for newspaper articles.