The Grotesque in Church Art Part 5

I venture, as to the signification of the two figures, to make a suggestion to stand good until a better be found. In the Mystery Play ent.i.tled the "Trial of Mary and Joseph" (Cotton MS., Pageant xiv., amplified out of the Apocryphal New Testament, _Protevan_, xi.), the story runs that Mary and Joseph, particularly the former, are defamed by two Slanderers. The Bishop sends his Summoner for the two accused persons, and orders that they drink the water of vengeance "which is for trial," a kind of miraculous ordeal by poison. Joseph drinks and is unhurt; Mary likewise and is declared a pure maid in spite of facts. One of the Slanderers declares that the drink has been changed because the Virgin was of the High Priest's kindred, upon which the Slanderer is himself ordered to drink what is left in the cup. Doing so he instantly becomes frantic. All ask pardon of Mary for their suspicions, and, that being granted, the play is ended.

Now the play commences with the meeting of the Two Slanderers. A brief extract or two will shew their method.

1ST DETRACTOR.--To reyse blawthyr is al my lay, Bakbyter is my brother of blood Dede he ought come hethyr in al this day Now wolde G.o.d that he were here, And, by my trewth, I dare well say That if we tweyn to gethyr apere Mor slawndyr we t[w]o schal a rere With in an howre thorwe outh this town, Than evyr ther was this thouwsand yer, Now, be my trewth, I have a sight Evyn of my brother ... Welcome ...

2ND DETRACTOR.--I am ful glad we met this day.

1ST DETRACTOR.--Telle all these pepyl [the audience] what is yor name--

2ND DETRACTOR.--I am Bakbyter, that spyllyth all game, Both hyd and known in many a place.

Then they fall to, and in terms of some wit and much freedom describe the physical condition of she who was "calde mayd Mary."

The Two Slanderers in this play are undoubtedly men, for each styles the other "brother." Yet there are words in their dialogue, not suited to these pages, which could properly only be used by women. As in at least one of the carvings the sinners are women, if my hypothesis has any correctness there must be some other form of the story in which the detractors are female. It is to be noted, also, that the play from which I have quoted has no mention of the devil.

[Ill.u.s.tration: A BACKBITER, ST. KATHERINE'S.]

Years before I met with the play of the trial of Joseph and Mary, I considered that the sin of the Two might be scandal, and put down a curious carving adjoining the St. Katherine group as a reference to it, and suggested it might be a humorous rendering of a Backbiter. This is shewn in the accompanying block. It was therefore agreeable to find one of the Mystery detractors actually named Backbiter. Against that it may be mentioned that the composite figure with a head at the rear is not unique.

At Rothwell, Northamptonshire, is a dragon attempt, rude though probably of late fifteenth century work, with a similar head in the same anatomical direction; this is not connected with anything that can be considered bearing upon the subject of the Mystery, unless the heads on the same misericorde are meant to be those of Jews.

The example at Ely shews the fiend closely embracing the two sinners who are evidently in the height of an impressive conversation. One figure has a book on its knee, the other is telling the beads of a rosary. At the sides are two imps of a somewhat Robin Goodfellow-like character, each bearing a scroll with the account of the misdeeds of the sinners, and which we may presume are the warrants by which Satan is ent.i.tled to seize his prey. He is the picture of jovial good-nature.

[Ill.u.s.tration: A BACKBITER, ROTHWELL, NORTHANTS.]

New College, Oxford, has a misericorde of the subject in which the figures, female in appearance, are seated in a sort of box. This reminds us of Baldini and Boticelli's picture of h.e.l.l, which is divided into various ovens for different vices. That may be the idea here, or perhaps the object is a coffin and is used to emphasize what the wages of sin are. They, like the two sinners of Ely, are in animated conversation.

Satan here is of a bull-headed form with wings rather like those of a b.u.t.terfly. These are of the end of the fifteenth century.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE UNSEEN WITNESS, NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD.]

There are foreign carvings described by Mr. Evans as being of the devil taking notes of the idle words of two women during ma.s.s. This is, perhaps, the simple meaning of all this series, and an evidence of the resentment of ecclesiastics against the irreverent. There is considerable evidence that religious service was scarcely a solemn thing in mediaeval times. If this is the signification the box arrangement described above may be some sort of early pew.

The next example, from St. Katherine's (lately) by the Tower, has the fiend in a fashionable slashed suit. The ladies here are only in bust, and though of demurely interested expression they have not that rapport and animation which distinguish the two previously noticed. Satan does not embrace them, but stands behind with legs outstretched and hands, or rather claws, on knees, ready to clutch them at the proper moment.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE UNSEEN WITNESS, ST. KATHERINE'S.]

At Gayton, Northants, is a further curious instance of this group. The two Sinners are in this case unquestionably males, and, but for the coincidence with the preceding examples, the men might have been supposed to have been engaged in some game of chance. It will be observed that the one to the right has a rosary as in the first-named carving. Satan here is well clothed in feathers, and in his left wing is the head of what is probably one of the instruments of torture awaiting the very much overshadowed victims. It is a kind of rake or flesh-hook, with three sharp, hooked teeth; perhaps a figure of the tongue of a slanderer, materialized for his own subsequent scarification; it may be added as a kind of satanic badge. Satan bears on his right arm a leaf-shaped shield.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE UNSEEN WITNESS, GAYTON, NORTHANTS.]

The vice next to be regarded is Avarice. In a misericorde at Beverley Minster we have three scenes from the history of the Devil. One gives us the avaricious man bending before his coffers. He has taken out a coin; if we read aright his contemplative and affectionate look, it is gold.

Hidden behind the chest behold Satan, one of whose bullock horns is visible as he lurks out of the miser's sight, grinning to think how surely the victim is his.

At the opposite end of the carving is the other extreme, Gluttony. A man is drinking out of a huge flask, which he holds in his right hand, while in the other he grasps a ham (or is it not impossible that this is a second bottle). In this the devil is likewise present; he is apparently desperately anxious the victim should have enough.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE DEVIL AND THE MISER, BEVERLEY MINSTER.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: SATAN AND A SOUL, BEVERLEY MINSTER.]

Between these two reliefs appears Satan seizing a naked soul. In the original all that remains of the Devil's head is the outline and one horn; of the soul's head there remains only the outline; the two faces I have ventured to supply, also the fore-arm of the Devil. The fiend is here again presented with the attributes of a bullock, rather than a goat.

Satan has had placed on his abdomen a mask or face, a somewhat common method of adding to the startling effect of his boisterous personality.

The fine rush which the fiend is making upon the soul, and the shrinking horror of the latter, are exceedingly well rendered. The moral is, we may suppose, that the sinners on either side will come to the same bad end.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE DEVIL AND THE GLUTTON, BEVERLEY MINSTER.]

Among the seat-carvings of Henry VII's. Chapel, Westminster Abbey, we have the vice of Avarice more fully treated, there being two carvings devoted to the subject. In the first we see a monk suddenly seized by a quaint and curious devil (to whom I have supplied his right fore-arm). The monk, horror-stricken, yet angry, has dropped his bag of sovereigns, or n.o.bles, and the coins fall out. He would escape if he could, but the claws of the fiend have him fast.

[Ill.u.s.tration: DISMAY, WESTMINSTER.]

In the companion carving we have the incident--and the monk--carried a little further. The devil has picked him up, thrown him down along his conveniently horizontal back, and strides on with him through a wild place of rocks and trees, holding what appears to be a flaming torch, which he also uses as a staff. The monk has managed to gather up his dearly-loved bag of money, and is frantically clutching at the rocks as he is swiftly borne along. Satan in the first carving has rather a benevolent human face, in the second a debased beast face, unknown to natural history.

There is no explanation of how Satha.n.u.s has disposed in the second scene of the graceful dragon wings he wears in the first. It is probable that two of the Italians who carved this set each took the same subject, and we have here their respective renderings. I mention with diffidence that if the mild and timorous face of Bishop Alc.o.c.k (which may be seen at Jesus College, Cambridge), the architect of this part of the abbey, could be supposed to have unfortunately borne at any time the expressions upon either of these two representations of the monk, the likeness would, in my opinion, be rather striking.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE OVERTAKING OF AVARICE, WESTMINSTER.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE TAKING OF THE AVARICIOUS, WESTMINSTER.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: DEMONIACAL DRUMMER, WESTMINSTER.]

On the side carving of the carrying-away scene is shewn a woman, dismayed at the sight. On the opposite side a fiend is welcoming the monk with beat of drum, just as we shall see the ale-wife saluted with the drone of the bagpipes.

[Ill.u.s.tration: VANITY, ST. MARY'S MINSTER.]

A carving at St. Mary's Minster, Isle of Thanet, has the devil looking out with a vexed frown from between the horns of a lofty head-dress, which is on a lady's head. Whether this be a rendering of the dishonest ale-wife, or a separate warning against the vice of Vanity, cannot well be decided.

There was a popular opinion at one time that the bulk of church carvings were jokes at the expense of clergy, probably largely because every hood was thought to be a cowl. There is, however, no doubt as to the carving here presented. It may represent the consecration of a bishop. The presence of Satan dominating both the individuals, and pulling forward the cowl of the seated figure, appears to declare that this is to ill.u.s.trate the vice of Hypocrisy. It is at New College, Oxford.

[Ill.u.s.tration: HYPOCRISY, NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD.]

Ale and the Ale-wife.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE JOLLY TAPSTER, LUDLOW.]

Ale, good old ale, has formed the burden of more songs and satires ancient and modern, than will ever be brought together. Ale was the staple beverage for morning, noon, and evening meals. It is probable that swollen as is the beer portion of the Budget, the consumption of ale, man for man, is much less than that of any mediaeval time. The records of all the authoritative bodies who dealt with the liquor traffic of the olden time are crowded with rules and regulations that plainly demonstrate not only the universal prevalence of beer drinking in a proper and domestic degree, but also the constant growing abuse of the sale of the liquor. In the reign of Elizabeth the evils of the tavern had become so notorious, that in some places women were forbidden to keep ale-houses.

As far back as A.D. 794, ale-houses had become an inst.i.tution, for we find the orders pa.s.sed at the Council of Frankfort in that year included one by which ecclesiastics and monks were forbidden to drink in an ale-house. St.

Adrian was the patron of brewers.

In some boroughs (Hull may be given as an instance) in the fifteenth century, the Mayor was not allowed to keep a tavern in his year of office.

Brewers and tavern keepers, with many nice distinctions of grade among them, were duly licensed and supervised, various penalties meeting attempts at illicit trade. The quality of ale was also an object of solicitude, and an official, called the ale-taster, was in nearly every centre of population made responsible for the due strength and purity of the national beverage. It was customary in some places in the fifteenth century for the ale-taster to be remunerated by a payment of 4d. a year from each brewer.

It has to be remembered ale was drunk at the meals at which we now use tea, coffee, and cocoa; it will be interesting to glance at an instance of the rate at which it was consumed. At the Hospital of St. Cross, founded in 1132, at Winchester, thirteen "impotent" men had each a daily allowance of a gallon and a half of good small beer, with more on holidays; this was afterwards reduced to three quarts with some two quarts extra for holidays. The porter at the gate had only three quarts to give away to beggars. There was great idea of continuity at this establishment; even in 1836 there was spent 133 5s. for malt and hops for the year's brewing.

The happy thirteen had each yet three quarts every day as well as a jack (say four gallons) extra among them on holidays, with 4s. for beer money.

Two gallons of beer were also daily dispensed at the gate at the rate of a horn of not quite half a pint to each applicant.

[Ill.u.s.tration: LETTICE LITTLETRUST AND A SIMPLE SIMON. WELLINGBOROUGH, _14th century_.]