Page images

then see how he would prove that Edward VI. was not, as he ought to have been, completely crowned after the ancient manner and custom of his fathers. I leave the matter to the consideration of the reader.14

Queen Mary was crowned according to the old and full form of the Liber Regalis: Holinshed gives a very long description of the pageants, as she went to the Abbey; but of the service itself he merely states, that "the coronation and other ceremonies and solemnities were according to the old custome." 15 Archbishop Parker corroborates this, and says; "regina Maria missationibus sacrisque pontificiis, uncta regnoque initiata est."16 Queen Elizabeth was also crowned according to the old rites, and with the celebration of the mass, omitting only the elevation of the host."

14 Holinshed, in a general way, asserts that "his coronation was solemnized in due forme and order, with all the roialtie and honour which therevnto apperteined." vol. 3. p. 979.

I am indebted to a friend for a transcript also of a contemporary account of this coronation, (Harleian MS. 3504.) possibly drawn up by an eye-witness, in which it is asserted that the sceptres were delivered to the king, by two noblemen and also, that he was anointed on the soles of his feet. I hesitate to place much reliance on this document, where it differs from the council-minute; and the writer, without intending it, might have both mistaken and misrepresented facts.

15 Vol. 3. p. 1091.

16 De antiquitate Brit. Ecc p. 509.

17 Burnet, vol. 3. p. 762. It seems certain however that there was only one bishop present, Oglethorpe, of Carlisle: and Collier, speaking loosely, says that the solemnity" was performed according to ancient custom, and directed by the Roman pontifical." vol. 2. p. 412. The ancient custom was very different from the Roman order. But some modification of the old rubrics of the Liber Regalis must have unavoidably taken place, in consequence of the refusal of the bishops to attend. It has been said that the queen never forgot or forgave their resolution in this matter: see Ellis, Original Letters, 3rd Series, vol. 2. p. 324.

The new Form, new, that is, in its language more than in its order and details, was first used upon the occasion of the coronation of King James in 1603; and this, with some alterations, has been "the Coronation Service," up to the present day.

By a careful examination of the notes below, the reader will be able, I trust, to trace sufficiently for himself, the principal changes which have been made, from time to time, during the last two centuries and for more exact enquiry, (these modern services being rather incidentally than truly within the proper limits of my subject) I must refer him to the Forms themselves, all of which are, I believe, still extant in our great libraries. 18

18 Besides the Bodleian and the British Museum, several Forms, not to be found elsewhere, are in the libraries of Lambeth, and of the dean and chapter of Westminster.


I do not enter into any account or history of the regalia: much information may be obtained from common books respecting them, such as Sandford, or Taylor, in the "Glory of regality." regalia now used are not the ancient ones those having been destroyed, and melted down, by order of the Long Parliament: among them, it is said, the genuine crown of K. Alfred. The modern crowns, sceptres, &c., were made for Charles II.

There is however one monument of antiquity remaining, the Coronation Chair. The legend

is, that it is the stone on which the patriarch Jacob laid his head in the plain of Luz; that it was brought from Egypt to Spain; from thence to Ireland A. c. 700; carried to Scotland A. c. 300; and at last offered at the shrine of Edward the Confessor at Westminster by K. Edward I. Whatever amount of truth there may be in this, the remark is just, that "this is the antientest respected monument in the world, for though some others may be more antient as to duration, yet thus superstitiously regarded they are not." Toland, Hist. of the Druids. p. 104. The stone was reckoned among the Jewels of Scotland: thus, in the Wardrobe account of Edward the first, we find; "Jocalia remanentia in fine anni xxvij mi. de jocalibus quæ fuerunt quon

The coronation Oath, and the history of it, have been so accurately investigated and explained by va

dam regis Scocie, inventis in castro de Edeneburgh anno xxv to, videlicet, Ciphus argenti, etc. Una petra magna super quam reges Scocie solebant coronari." Liber quotidianus, 4to. p. 353. See also Chalmers' Caledonia, vol. 1. p. 468. cit. Glory of regality, p. 58. The first chair was made by Kenneth of Scotland, in the ninth century: and Edward I. ordered a new chair, for the payment of which a considerable sum is entered in the Wardrobe accounts of the year 1300.

There is no record of the first coronation at which the stone was used in England: probably by Edward II. And even if Edward I. did not specify the purpose to which it was, in after ages, to be put, it is not likely that his successors would either forget the old traditions about it, or neglect to secure to themselves the blessings which were promised to those, who should have the power and be entitled to be crowned on it. But it is not to be denied, (and the writers upon the regalia have not noticed this circumstance) that an early authority, Thomas Walsingham, says that Edward deposited it at Westminster, for the use of the celebrant at the Confessor's shrine. His statement is; "In redeundo autem transivit per ab

bathiam de Scone, ubi sublato lapide quo reges Scotorum tempore coronationis solebant uti pro throno, transtulit illum usque Westmonasterium, jubens idem fieri celebrantium cathedram sacerdotum." Ypodigma Neustriæ. p. 485.

Before the reformation, all the regalia, it is said, were kept at Westminster, under the care of the abbot and convent: and now, though deposited in the Tower, they are brought the evening before the coronation to the dean of Westminster, and are left after the ceremony in his charge, at the shrine of the Confessor. Rishanger in his Chronicle, speaking of the two sceptres being carried in procession by the abbot of Westminster, adds: "Hoc officium fecit abbas, non quia primus est inter abbates, sed quia regalium insignium est repositorium locus suus." cit. Taylor. p. 92. But compare an order "thesaurario et camerariis de scaccario" to deliver up the golden eagle with the ampulla. An. 8. Henr. VI. Rymer. Fœ 4. p. 151. And again in 1220, a similar order "Petro de malo lacu," to bring the "regale, quod penes ipsum est apud Corff." Tom. 1. pars. 1. p. 81.

There is, however, one


rious authors,19 that I shall merely add one or two observations upon points, which I do not remember to

have seen noticed elsewhere.

Either in the rituals,

nant of the ancient regalia, if I may so entitle it, still entrusted to the custody of the dean of Westminster: viz: the Liber Regalis. This most valuable volume, so often to be referred to below, is a thin folio, of 38 leaves of vellum. There are four illuminations in it, each occupying nearly a page, prefixed to the offices which correspond. 1. Of a king being crowned. 2. Of a king and queen crowned together. 3. Of a queen alone. 4. Of a king lying in state. These illuminations are executed upon a very rich ground of highly burnished gold, with scrolls, according to the fashion of that time, represented by minute punctures upon the surface. A fac-simile, with a description of the book is given by Mr. Westwood, in his Palæographia Sacra. The date of the manuscript cannot be later than the reign of Richard II., for whose coronation it has been supposed to have been written; but the illuminations represent a monarch much older than he was on

* In which case, the book would have been written in his reign. And it is remarkable, that the chair in which the sovereign sits,

that occasion, and the likeness must either therefore be conventional, or intended for his predecessor, Edward III.* or for himself in after-life. Whatever the fact may be, the intrinsic value and importance of the Liber Regalis is not affected; it still remains, "the Royal Book," the Book of the Royal Offices, to be performed and observed according to the Use of the Royal Church of Westminster, in the fourteenth century.

I would observe here, that an ancient privilege of the king, at his coronation, was to nominate a nun to be received into certain abbeys; for example, Shaftsbury, Wilton, and Barking. The forms are given in the Fœdera. Tom. 4. pars. iv. p. 152. 156.

19 The student should consult Rymer, Fœdera: Blackstone, Commentaries, vol. 1. Prynne, Signal Loyalty: Wharton, Troubles of Archbishop Laud, p. 318. Taylor, Glory of Regality, p. 329-344.

is not of that character, which is attributed to the later years of Edward III., as being made by him, for the stone.

or in the historians, (in the first exactly, in the last in general terms) we can trace the oath and its successive changes, from the time of K. Ethelred, to the present day. The promises and oath of William the Conqueror, are thus related. In the chronicle of Walter Hemingford: "Requisitus Eborum archiepiscopus ad tuenda, conservandaque jura et privilegia ecclesiastica eum solemniter sacramentis astrinxit." 20 More fully, by Hoveden: "— consecratus est honorifice, sed prius, ut idem archipræsul ab eo exigebat, ante altare S. Petri coram clero et populo, jurejurando promittens se velle sanctas Dei ecclesias, ac rectores earum defendere, necnon et cunctum populum sibi subjectum juste, ac regali providentia regere, rectam legem statuere, et tenere, rapinas injustaque judicia penitus interdicere." £1


According to the modern Orders, it is expressly directed that the sovereign should sign the oath: and there is a remarkable passage in an epistle of Thomas a Becket to king Henry, which would seem to refer to a subscribed declaration or oath at his coronation. The archbishop is particularly alluding to that solemnity, and to the rite of unction. He reminds the king; "Inunguntur reges in capite, etiam pectore et brachiis, quod significat gloriam, sanctitatem, et fortitudinem.— Audiat, si placeat, dominus meus, consilium servi sui, commonitionem episcopi sui, castigationem patris sui, ne cum schismaticis habeat de cætero aliquam fami

20 Script. x. tom. 2. p. 457. 21 Edit. Savile. p. 258. Concerning William Rufus, see Eadmer, Lib. 1. an. 1087. Of Henry I. (whose "Ordo" will be often

referred to below) Knyghton, de event. Angl. Script. xv. tom. 2. p. 2396. and Giraldus Cambrensis, de instr. Principum. Anglia Christiana, p. 43.

« PreviousContinue »