Romanesque building. The sight of Vézelay was well worth the trouble of my journey by diligence from Auxerre, and of my walk from Avallon." XXV.—DATE OF THE EXCOMMUNICATIONS AT VÉZELAY (p.186). The day is variously stated. Dr. Giles (I do not know on what authority) says that it was Easter-day (Life and Letters, i. 332). Herbert (vii. 229) and Gervase (1400), followed by Mr. Buss (399), name St. Mary Magdalene's day (July 22), when, for the festival of the patroness, " very many nations flock from various kingdoms " (Herb.). But it is evident, from the correspondence (which is better authority than Herbert's narrative, written from memory long after), that it was earlier (see iv. 195; Joh. Sarisb., ep. 175, fin, &c.). Diceto (539) and Wendover (ii. 313) place the excommunication on Ascension-day; Dr. Pauli (as I myself formerly did) on the Sunday following (68). But the best authority seems to be the circumstantial account given by John of Salisbury in a letter to the Bishop of Exeter (Ep. 145, col. 137), which is followed in the text. From Soissons to Vézelay must have been a journey of more than two days, and the Whitsun festival will account better than the Ascension for the words "de diversis nationibus," which John uses in describing the assembled crowds. Dr. Pauli observes that the words of Nicolas of Rouen (Thom. Ep. 347)—“ Alii quoque conjectant quod in festo S. Mariæ Magdalenæ in regis personam sententiam preferetis (taken in conjunction with the discordant statements of John of Salisbury and Herbert) "might suggest the supposition of two scenes at Vézelay" (69), and Dom Brial (Rec. des Hist., xvi. 255) infers the same from Gervase of Canterbury's narrative. But this appears to be a mistake, and Dr. Pauli does not venture to adopt it. 66 XXVI.—BECKET'S VESTMENTS AT SENS (p. 199). "The length of the vestments," says Professor Stanley, "confirms the account of his great stature. On the feast of 'St. Thomas,' till very recently, they were worn for that one day by the officiating priest. The tallest priest was always selected, and even then it was necessary to pin them up" (Hist. Mem. of Canterbury, 181, ed. 3). But, although the age of the vestments seems to be undisputed, their great length might rather suggest a doubt whether they belonged to Becket; for, while he is said to have been “statura procerus” (Fitzst. 185), and Herbert even speaks of his "proceritatem egregiam” (vii. 165), there is nothing, that I am aware of, in the old writers to suggest the idea that his height was so extraordinary as to render these articles suitable for him. (The Sens tradition is that he was 6 feet 4 inches, French, in height-equal to 6 feet 7 inches English.) There is, however, a passage in a letter of Peter of La Celle to John of Salisbury, which, if it relate to Becket's chasuble, would seem to imply that he wore one of disproportionate size—“Quasi de magnitudine cassulæ tunc archiepiscopi Thomæ, nunc pretiosissimi martyris, conquerebar[?] ubi posset reperiri" (Ep. 124, Patrol. ccii.); but I do not pretend to understand this, and cassula may possibly mean a reliquary or shrine. (See Ducange, s. v.) Mr. Shaw supposes that "the zeal of his admirers" may have made a very common mistake as to some of these vestments, in attributing them to St. Thomas of Canterbury; but that, "with regard to many of them, it is probable that the tradition is correct." (Dresses and Decorations of the Middle Ages, vol. i.) As to the history of them, M. Chaillou des Barres states that they were disI covered in 1523 in an ancient house in the cathedral cloister. (L'Abbaye de Pontigny, 63.) But how were they known to have belonged to Becket? XXVII. BECKET AND THE ABBOT OF ST. ALBAN'S (p. 261). The contemporary documents give no hint that Becket proceeded beyond Southwark after being charged to return to Canterbury; and we are left to judge whether Matthew Paris has here presented us with an authentic tradition preserved in the monastery of St. Alban's, or with a fiction. invented for the glory of that house. The less favourable supposition seems to be the more likely; for not only is the silence of Becket's contemporaries a ground of presumption against the story, but it does not appear in the older chronicles of St. Alban's itself-being one of the passages interpolated into the text of Roger Wendover by Matthew Paris, whose unscrupulousness in such matters is notorious. (See Pauli, 882.) The variations between Matthew's two narratives are not in favour of his general truth; and the manner in which, in one of them, he mixes up the Abbot's alleged expedition to Woodstock with that of Richard of St. Martin's, brings him into something like a direct contradiction of the earlier writers. XXVIII.-HUGH MAUCLERC (p. 282). "An accursed man, Hugh of Horsea, known by the appellation of the Ill Clerk," says Southey (Book of the Church, ed. 4, p. 143), apparently following Fuller, who speaks of him as "an officer of the church, called Hugh, the Ill Clerk " (i. 316, ed. Nichols). But Malus Clericus was evidently a surname Malclerc (Garnier, 151) or Mauclerc (ib. 146); " Hugo, re et nomine Malus Clericus appellatus," Gervas. 1416; "Malus Clericus, Gallicè Mauclerc," Ducange, s. v.). Walter Mauclerc was a judge, and Bishop of Carlisle, in the reign of John (Godwin de Præsul. 763; Foss, ii. 404); and it is probably the same name which has in later times taken the form of Mockler— perhaps, too, that of Manclarke. Benedict of Peterborough (S. T. C. ii. 66; Vita Henr. II. 12) ascribes the scattering of the Archbishop's brains to the fourth knight (De Morville), whom he also describes as the one whose sword was broken, and as having been instigated by the reproach of one of his companions on account of his backwardness to strike; and this statement is copied by Hoveden (298-9) and by the author of a "Passion" (in S. T. C. ii. 145). Herbert says that, "ut dicebatur," it was Robert de Broc (vii. 345). M. Thierry quotes (iii. 190) from some Latin verses in Hearne's appendix to William of Newburgh (p. 723, Oxon. 1719): "Willelmus Maltret percussit cum pede sanctum The historian, however, appears to overrate the value of this as a confirmation of his Saxon theory: for (1) the incident most likely never occurred in the manner described. The most authentic writers do not mention any other insult to the lifeless body than that which is related in the text; and this was probably the foundation of the verses, in which the name of the actor, his act, and his words, are all altered. (2.) There was no insurrection, Saxon or other, which could have given occasion for such a speech. (3.) Even if the versifier's story were true, it would be absurd to lay any especial stress on the sense of the word Angligenas-brought in, as it evidently is, for the sake of the metre. And (4.) the verses are altogether of such a character that it is absurd to treat them as any authority. The popular story (which has, I believe, been universally owed by painters who have treated the subject) reprets Becket as having been murdered at the altar. Some the high altar; others, with a greater appearance of cision, the altar of St. Benedict; Trivet (p. 67) that of Denys. That the fact was otherwise need not be ued, after what has been said by Professors Willis (pp. 140) and Stanley. But it may be worth while to point how early this feature was introduced into the story. in of Salisbury, who, although he had not the courage stand by his master, was probably in some part of the hedral while the murder took place, in writing, only a v days after the event, says that the martyr suffered before Christ's altar" (Ep. 304). About the same time anonymous writer tells the Pope that the murderers on him "ante altare" (S. T. C., vi. 304); and Theold, Count of Blois-" Effusus est sanguis justus ubi stræ viaticum salutis solebat immolari" (S. T. C., iv. 212). illiam of Newburgh-" Sacerdotum magnum, stantem ad ationem ante venerandum altare, peremerunt" (ii. 25, 156). The Lambeth biographer-" Ante altare" (123). tzstephen, however, has " secus aram" (i. 303), which is t quite fairly rendered in Mr. Froude's volume, "before e altar" (p. 557); and in some of the old writers, while ere are general expressions which seem to countenance e common story, these are corrected by more particular atements; thus, Diceto has "coram altari," and afterards "a dextris altaris S. Benedicti" (555-6). An altar as afterwards erected in honour of "St. Thomas," immeately behind the spot on which the "martyrdom " took ace (see Erasmus, ed. Nichols, 113, and Stanley on "the rine of Becket"); but at the time of the murder, the tar of St. Benedict stood, not on the site of that later -ection, but in a small chapel to the north of it. |