332
NOTES AND QUERIES. [12 s. iv. DEC., ww.
1483 which is said to describe the glass as
being then ancient, I think it may be
convenient if I state in these columns that
Leach was misled by an unfortunate error
in Kirby's ' Annals,' at p. 222.
In support of his statement that the bill for the glass was paid in 1483, Kirby mis- quoted an entry in the College Accounts of 1482-3, printing it thus :
" Sol. pro factura iij* 1 pedum vitri antiqui pro magna fenestra in nova capella ad ijd. iiiq. per pedem, ad minus in toto iijd. . . .xviijs."
His comment was :
" Twopence three farthings per foot seems a low price, which may be explained by the circum- stance of the glass being second-hand. As nearly all the figures are those of female saints, it was probably designed for, or bought out of, some nunnery."
Between this comment and the original entry there is, however, a wide gulf fixed- For the words " in nova capella " (which would undoubtedly have meant Thurbern's Chantry) do not exist in the original entry. There the words really are " in novaTurre," and they refer, not to the Chantry, but to the Chapel Tower which was erected above it. The entry relates to the glazing of a window in the Tower, for which old glass was used. There is no evidence that this was painted glass.
Having explained the error by which Leach was misled, I will now set out all the items in our ' Custus Capelle ' for 14823 which are concerned with glazing. It will be seen that Kirby's extract was inaccurate in other details besides that of substituting " capella " for " turre " :
" Et in Solutis Stephano vitrifico laboranti circa remotionem et Facturam de Novo ij panys in Fenestris australibus capelle per viij dies mensis Novembris, capienti per diem iiijd., ijs. viijd. Et eidem pro factura iiij pedum vitri antiqui pro magna Fenestra in nova Turre, precium pedis iid. ob. q. minus in toto iiijd., xviijs. In Solutis Roberto Robynson Vitriareo et Famulo eiusdem laborantibus per vij dies mensis Februarii circa Remotionem et Reparacionem Fenestrarum capelle, quorum unus capit per diem iiijd., alter capit per diem iijd., iiijs. jd. In communis
eorumdem per idem tempus, ijs In viij barris
ferreis emptis pro diversis Fenestris in turri ponderantibus xiiij lb., precium lb. ijd., ijs. iiijd. Et in solutis Roberto Robynson vitreario la- boranti per xxxiij dies mensibus Septembris et Octobris circa f enestras nove turris et reparacionem aliarum fenestrarum in Capella, et capit per diem ut supra iiijd. cum ijs. vjd. pro communis eiusdem per duas septimanas et dimidiam, xiijs. vjd. Et uni laboranti famulo cum eo per v dies mensi: Septembris, capienti per diem iijd. cum xiid. pro communis eiusdem, ijs. iijd Et in solutis pro
reparacione imaginis sancte Katerine in fenestra
nove capelle, vd." (The italics, used to indicate
locality of work, are my own.)
The final item is important. It is the only
one which relates to Thurbern's Chantry
all the others relate either to the College
Chapel (to which that Chantry was built as
an adjunct) or to the Tower ; and it affords
evidence that the glass now in Fromond's
Chantry was already in Thurbein's by
1482-3. For, of the five chief lights now in
the Fromond window, the fifth, as it now is
but it was the fourth before the alterations
of 1898 contains a much damaged figure
of a female saint, crowned, and holding in
her right hand a sword with the point
towards her feet, presumably the St. Katha-
rine who was already needing a repair in
14823. I am aware that in The Wykehamist
of July 28, 1898, it was said of this figure,
" Originally the Madonna and child now
the Madonna only." But that ascription
must, I submit, be rejected, even though it
seems, from what is there stated, that it had
enjoyed the support of no less an authority
than Archbishop Benson.
For a representation of the Blessed Trinity similar in many respects to that which is in the Fromond window see Archceologia, vol. xi. (1794), plate xiv. (at p. 320), figure 5, the reproduction of a woodcut. At p. 365, at the end of note Cx), t is stated that the woodcut came at the commencement of a grant of indulgence printed and issued as a handbill by Cardinal 'ampeggio, Bishop of Salisbury. The Car- dinal held this bishopric from 1524 to 1534.
H. C.
Winchester College.
This discussion illustrates the lamentable neglect of American work by British scholars. The exact point of the query is the subject- matter of chap. xiv. in ' Visual Representa- tions of the Trinity : an Historical Survey,' by J. B. MacHarg, 1917. This chapter (pp. 77-81, 'The Trinity of the Broken Body') includes a long list of examples, since (p. 77) " Detzel, a German, finds that representations of the Trinity with the dead body of Christ ' are numerous, especially in the old German school ' (' Christliche Ikono- graphie,' 1894, p. 64)." Further (p. 79) : " In the Frankfort picture, recently described by F. R. Uebe [' Skulpturennachahmung auf den Niederlandischen Altartremalden des loten J.,' 1913, p. 13], the standing God-Father holds the dead body of Christ, and the picture naturally suggests a Descent from the Cross. . . .Imitations and similar representations are numerous. Uebe mentions five such in Louvain alone."
As to the Canterbury tomb, I thought it
probable either (1) that the Dove had ^ been
painted out in some " restoration," or
