« НазадПродовжити »
his doing so was quite in keeping with the rest of his domestic policy, which strove to give him a power and domination that should be felt in every relation, no matter how trifling or how personal. 1 Henry VIII., c. 14, “ An Act agaynst wearing of costly apparell,” forbad any but the king and his family to wear cloth of gold, of purple colour, or of silk of the same. None less than a duke might wear any cloth of gold of tissue; none less than an earl might wear sables; and none less than a baron might wear cloth of gold or silver, or“ tynsen satten," or silk or cloth mixed or embroidered with gold or silver. None less than a lord or knight of the garter might wear woollen cloth made out of the kingdom, or wear any velvet of “the colour of crymesyn or blewe;" none less than a knight (excepting some of the royal servants and the judges) might wear velvets and furs; “nor no person (might) use or wear satten or damaske in their doblett, nor sylke or chamlett in their gowens or cootes, not having for life £20 a year in lands;" no one “under the degree of a gentleman” might wear
foreign fur”; no servant was to be dressed in cloth that cost more than twenty pence a yard. Knights only might wear “guarded and pinched (pleated) shirts of linen cloth." Servants in husbandry were not to have cloth of which the piece was more than ten pence a yard. This statute was not to apply to women, ambassadors, heralds, players in interludes, nor to soldiers.
In the sixth year of Henry another and more stringent law was passed, which, having been found insufficient, was repealed, and re-enacted more thoroughly in the following year. The preamble of this statute recites, that “Forasmuch as the grette and costly array and apparel used within this realm contrary to good statutes thereof made, hath been the occasion of great impoverishing of divers of the king's subjects, and provoked divers of them to rob and to do extortion, and other unlawful deeds, to maintain thereby their costly array.” In the 24 Henry VIII., another sumptuary law was passed, by which the ..costume of everybody was regulated, as it was supposed, defi. nitely; and it did suffice, as far as any law could suffice, till the reign of Philip and Mary, in the first year of whose reign was passed “ An Acte for the Reformācon of Excesse in Apparaile,” by which the restraints on dress were made less comprehensive, though imprisonment was added to fine as a means of enforcing compliance with such orders as were retained. There was also a clause not unworthy the sex of the sovereign who assented to the law :-“ Provided also that women maye weare in their cappes, hattes, gyrdells, and hoodes as they or any of them might use and weare lawfully before the making of this Act.” An Act of Elizabeth, intended, it is imagined, to check unthrift, declared that any one who sold foreign apparel to persons having less than £3000 a year in land or fees, except for ready money, should lose the price of the same, no matter how it might have been secured.
By the 13 Eliz., c. 19, the last of the sumptuary laws, it would seem that though caps had been at one time a general article of attire, they had gone greatly out of fashion, causing thereby a grievous falling off in the cap-making business. This business seems to have been powerful enough to procure, as did the button-makers at a later date, special legislation in its favour. The above-named Act recites the evils that have arisen from the decay of the cap-making trade by the disuse of caps, and requires that every one above six years of age, except ladies, peers, and those who have twenty marks a year out of land, or who have “borne any office of worship in any city, borough, town, hamlet, or shire,” shall wear“upon the Sabothe and Holy Daye
one cappe of woll knytt, thicked, and dressed in England,” or be fined three shillings and four pence a day. This act was, however, repealed in the thirty-ninth year of the queen.
These various laws regulating the kind and quality of the apparel which men of all sorts and their belongings might wear, continued to be in existence, if not in operation, till the advent of James the First to the throne. By the 1 James I., C. 25, they were repealed, and folks were left to follow the bent of their own fancy, being bounded only by the same restraints as kept them from entering into any other extravagance. Not any attempt has since been made to revive sumptuary laws, though so late as the seventh year of George I. an Act was passed “to preserve and encourage the woollen and silk manufactures of this kingdom, and for more effectually employing the poor by prohibiting the use and wear of all printed, painted, stained, or dyed callicoes in apparel or household stuff, furniture or otherwise,” excepting only "such callicoes as shall be dyed all blue.” In the same session was passed the famous Act which prohibited the use of any buttons made of cloth, serge, or other stuffs, the object being to keep up the monopoly which workers in silk and mohair had established.
THE GRAVE-MOUNDS OF DERBYSHIRE, AND
BY LLEWELLYNN JEWITT, F.S.A., ETC., ETC.
THE ancient grave-mounds of Derbyshire lie, for the most part, scattered over the wild, mountainous, and beautiful district known as the High Peak—a district occupying nearly one-half of the county, and containing within its limits many towns, villages, and other places of extreme interest. It it true that here and there a grave-mound exists in the southern or lowland portion of the county, but, as a rule, they may be almost said to be peculiar, and confined, to the northern, or hilly, district, where in some parts they are very abundant. Indeed, there are districts where there is scarcely a hill, even in that land where,
“ Hills upon hills, Mountains on mountains rise,"
where a barrow does not exist or is not known to have existed. In passing along the old high road, for instance, over Middleton Moor by way of Arbor-Low,* Parcelly Hay, High Needham, Earl Sterndale, and Brier-Low, to Buxton, or along the high roads by way of Winster, Hartington or Newhaven, the practised eye has no difficulty in resting on the forms of grave-mounds on the summits of the different hills or mountains whose outlines stand out clear and distinct against the sky.
The situations chosen for the burial of the dead by the early inhabitants of Derbyshire were, in many instances, grand in the extreme. Formed on the tops of the highest hills, or on lower but equally imposing positions, the grave-mounds commanded a glorious prospect of hill and dale, wood and water, rock and
meadow, of many miles in extent, on every side, stretching out as far as the eye could reach, while they themselves could be seen from afar off in every direction by the tribes who had raised them, while engaged either in hunting or in their other pursuits.
In Derbyshire the grave-mounds are called “Lows" or “Barrows;" Low being so very usual a term in the district that wherever met with, it may be taken as a sure indication of a barrow now existing or having once existed at the spot. As & proof of this, it will only be necessary to say that at about two hundred places in Derbyshire alone, and at about half that
* Of this stone circle, the next in importance to Stonehenge, an account will be given in a future number.
number on the neighbouring borders of the adjoining county, Staffordshire, which bear the affix of Low, barrows have already been opened, or are known to exist. For my present purpose, the names of Arbor-Low, Kens-Low, Ringham-Low, Blake-Low, Fox-Low, Gib-Low, Green-Low, Great-Low, GrindLow, Cal-Low, Chelmorton-Low, Casking-Low, Larks-Low, Thirkel-Low, Ribden-Low, Har-Low, Bas-low, High-Low, Foo-Low, Lean-Low, Huck-Low, Borther-Low, Dow-Low, Totman's-Low, Staden-Low, and Stan-Low, will be quite sufficient to give as illustrative examples. To some of these I shall again have occasion to refer.
The grave-mounds of the district of which I am speaking may, naturally, be divided into the three great periods; the Celtic, the Romano-British, and the Anglo-Saxon. Of these by far the greatest number are Celtic, whilst the least number are Romano-British. It is my intention to divide my subject into these three periods, and, while speaking of the characteristics of each, to classify and describe the contents of the barrows and to point out, briefly, such circumstances of interment, and such evidences of customs, which they may present and which may appear to be of sufficient interest and importance for my purpose.
THE CELTIC PERIOD.
The barrows of the Celtic, or ancient British period vary in their form and size as much as they do in their modes of construction, and in their contents. Sometimes they are simply mounds of earth raised over the interment; sometimes heaps of stones piled up over the body; and sometimes again a combination of cist, and earth, and stone. Generally speaking, the mounds are circular, rising gradually and gently from the level of the ground towards the centre, but in some instances the rise is somewhat acute. Now and then they are oval in form. Where elliptical barrows occur (generally known as “long barrows") they are, I have reason to believe, not matters of original design, but of accident, through additional interments; and I much doubt the propriety of archæologists at the present day, continuing the very questionable nomenclaturo adopted by Sir R. C. Hoare and others. An examination of a very large number of barrows leads me to the opinion that the original form of all was circular, and that no deviation from that form, and no difference in section, can be taken as indicative of period or of race.
The Celtic barrows of Derbyshire contain interments both by inhumation and cremation, and the modes of interment vary very considerably. Where interment has been by inhumation, the body is mostly found in a contracted position on its side, (more commonly the left than the right side); the knees drawn up near to the chest, and the heels to the thighs; the elbows near the knees and the hands in front of the face; the head inclining somewhat forward. This position, which, as I have said, is the most usual one, will be best understood by reference to the accompanying engraving, which shows an interment found in a barrow on Smerril Moor, opened by my much
lamented friend the late Mr. Thomas Bateman. In this case, the body had been laid in an irregularly formed cavity on the surface of the natural rock, on a bed of clay, over which, as usual, the mound was formed of loose stones, and mould. Behind the skeleton, as will be seen in the engraving, was found a remarkably fine “drinking cup," along with other articles, about which I shall have occasion to speak.
Occasionally the body lies at full length, but this is quite the exception to the rule. In one or two instances in Derbyshire, as in Guernsey, the skeleton has been found in a contracted upright position in the stone cist of a barrow. This position will be seen in the annexed engraving which accurately represents the section of the barrow when the superincumbent earth and stones had been removed.
This barrow was situated at Parcelly Hay. The body had been placed in a small oval excavation in the solid rock, about