England’s earliest painted and framed Royal Coat of Arms (Edward VI, 1547-53) in St Mary’s Church, Westerham

In his introduction to a paper in Archaeologia Cantiana in 1931,[fn1] Torr described the pre-Reformation custom of displaying Royal Arms in churches and cathedrals using a variety of forms – carvings, stained glass or needlework – all underlining the ‘semi-spiritual character of Kingship’. His prime example of the Tudor arms of Henry VIII in King’s College chapel can be matched with the carvings over the gateway of Canterbury Cathedral erected in memory of Prince Arthur between 1517 and 1521 (Fig. 1). In due course, after the parting with Rome, there came [pg84]a concentration on a single representation in the form of a framed, painted Royal Coat of Arms on wood or canvas to mark the displacement of Papal Authority by Henry VIII and the establishment of Royal Supremacy over the Church of England. Kent remains rich in these examples of Royal heraldry and St Mary’s Westerham holds a special place in this regard. It possesses the oldest framed, painted Royal Coat of Arms, those of Edward VI (reigned 1547-53). Torr provides a definitive article on the Royal Arms of Westerham giving a full account of the church’s three paintings from the reigns of Edward VI, Charles II[fn2] and George III.

[fg]jpg|Fig. 1 Royal Arms of Henry VIII with Tudor emblems: Canterbury Cathedral.
(Photo: author.)|Image[/fg]

Torr particularly noted the ornamentation of Renaissance character in the fine quality painting of the Edward VI arms. His verdict has been endorsed by John Newman:[fn3]

The only arms of this reign and so, but for Rushbrooke, Suffolk (Fig. 2),[fn4] the earliest of all to survive in England.[fn5] Oil on panel. Much better done than most later Royal Arms and with a few Early Renaissance details typical of the period.

[fg]jpg|Fig. 2 Royal Arms of Henry VIII with Tudor emblems: Rushbrooke, Suffolk.
(Photo: author.)|Image[/fg]

This paper provides a brief recapitulation of the details of the Edward VI arms but concentrates on the involvement of members of the local Gresham family in its acquisition by St Mary’s and in turn their connections with artists from the Low Countries where this high quality painting may well have been executed.

Details of the Edward VI Coat of Arms and conservation measures

The Edward VI coat of arms is executed in oils on four boards joined horizontally [pg85]in a moulded frame to form a square and surmounted by a triangular pediment (Fig. 3). Encircled by the Order of the Garter, with its motto HONI. SOIT. QUI. MAL. Y. PENSE, the royal shield bears the fleurs-de-lys of France and the lions of England below the golden imperial style crown, lined with ermine, of Tudor heraldry. As supporters the spirited Welsh dragon of Henry VIII remains (sinister) but his [pg86] Beaufort hound is replaced (dexter) by a powerful crowned lion, a combination continued into the reign of Elizabeth I. These arms could indeed be attributed to Elizabeth from the letters ‘E’ and ‘R’ in the lower corners but across the foot of the painting above the lower motto DIEU ET MON DROIT, a further inscription reads DNE. SALVV. FAC. REGEM. Moreover, on either side of the crown at the top are two tablets containing the following inscriptions – VIVAT REX (on the left) and CURAT LEX (on the right).[fn6] The significance of the framed pediment will be discussed later since it has now been established that this is a later addition. The intended purpose of the painting is demonstrated by the construction method of the square frame, composed of four horizontal rather than vertical boards. This gave greater strength in a free-standing upright position on the church’s rood screen where it replaced the rood (crucifix) to provide a symbol of royal authority. Two slots on the bottom of the lowest board indicate how this was effected through the use of mortise and tenon joints.

[fg]jpg|Fig. 3 Royal Arms of Edward VI with added pediment: St Mary’s Church,
Westerham. (Photo: Stuart Barnes.)|Image[/fg]

In 1931 Torr’s concern about the state of the painting led the Vicar of Saint Mary’s to enlist expert help from a well-known family of London restorers, careful not to go too far but, greatly increasing the visibility of the whole composition. The front was cleaned but not retouched and the back was treated against the recurrence of woodworm. Cracking was infilled between the planks which were stabilised successfully by the insertion of nine mahogany ‘buttons’ on the back of the main panel. During the following 80 years, the condition of the painting again deteriorated. This was largely caused by its continuing location, from the nineteenth century onwards, over an ill-fitting doorway opening to the south, vulnerable to fluctuations of temperature and humidity as well as air pollution. Consequently, reports and estimates for conservation and restoration of both the Tudor and Hanoverian (1804) Royal Coats of Arms were obtained by St Mary’s Church in 2007. Hopes for support were dashed by the response that a higher level of deterioration had to be evident before a case could be considered. Four years later the author of this article was asked to re-assess the position with the objective of reviving the project[fn7] in order to mark the Diamond Jubilee in 2012 of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II whose own Royal Coat of Arms had been presented to the church to mark her coronation, making Westerham one of the few places to have representation from three reigns.[fn8] Following a successful fundraising campaign the necessary conservation work was undertaken in 2013.

Why Westerham?

This small market town perhaps seems an unlikely location for this survival, important to the national heritage not only for its antiquity but also for its artistic merit. Westerham was part of the large manorial landholding straddling the Kent/ Surrey border of the illustrious Gresham family which had very close Royal connections during the reigns of Henry VIII and his son. Surprisingly, however, no family memorials exist in the church as a reminder of the link.

The old inn on Westerham Green named the Grasshopper, emblem of the Greshams, is another reminder of the local ties with the fortunes of the family who rose to become ‘merchant princes’. For Westerham the key figure was John Gresham (1495-1556), younger brother of Richard Gresham (1485-1547), uncle of [pg87]Thomas Gresham (1519-1579), who ascribed his wide commercial knowledge to training under him and who is remembered as founder of the Royal Exchange and Gresham College in London.[fn9]

The Gresham brothers acted as agents for Henry VIII[fn10] and Cardinal Wolsey11 (accompanying them to the Field of Cloth and Gold in 1520), then undertook the same role for Thomas Cromwell and later sat on the Commission for enforcing Henry VIII’s Six Articles under Bishop Bonner. John Gresham’s major part in helping to develop overseas trade, principally in the Levant, led to his appointment by the Privy Council to examine disputes between English and foreign merchants. In the year that his brother became Lord Mayor of London (1537) both were knighted and he was also appointed Sheriff, foreshadowing his own election to the Mayoralty ten years later. He clearly shared his brother’s recorded views in serving Henry VIII as ‘comfortable in all things to His Highnes’s pleasure’ and, in consequence he also came to share in the rewards dispensed, at a price, by the monarch following the Dissolution of the Monasteries.

After the Abbot of Westminster, William Benson, surrendered the manor of Westerham to Henry VIII by an instrument dated 16 January 1539 it was granted on 16 August 1540 by the King to his ‘loving servant John Gresham of London Knight’ in consideration of £1,441 19s. 7d., together with Edenbridge and with the rectories and churches of the same. Westerham’s Rectory, held apart from the Vicarage, had been the property of the Prior and Chapter of Christ Church, Canterbury. When free from responsibilities in London and being resident at nearby Titsey just over the border in Surrey, he was able to take an active interest in his manor of Westerham and the Church of St Mary’s. We cannot know whether the Tudor emblems in the roof over the chancel owe their origin to his financial support. Court Rolls of the manor show him maintaining local involvement in the Town of Westerham and, for example, holding a court on 2nd May 1548.

Against this background, we could look to the commissioning by the Greshams of the Royal Coat of Arms of Edward VI for Westerham from a painter of the highest competence. A striking full-length portrait of Thomas Gresham as a young man in 1544 (Fig. 4), now hanging in the Mercers’ Hall, was attributed to Girolamo da Treviso or other artists employed by Henry VIII; however, scientific analysis, and the paints used as well as style supports re-attribution to an unknown Netherlandish artist, believed to be one commissioned by Thomas Gresham himself when in Antwerp.[fn12]

[fg]jpg|Fig. 4 Portrait of Thomas Gresham in 1544: Mercers Hall, London. (© The Mercers’ Company of London.)|Image[/fg]

When was the Royal Arms painting commissioned?

With an initial grant from the Society of Antiquaries,[fn13] the opportunity arose during the 2013 conservation work in the studio of Plowden and Smith for Ian Tyers to undertake a dendrochronological analysis funded by English Heritage. Using a micro computer-based travelling stage to obtain readings three of the four boards yielded tree-ring datings that supported the authenticity of the painting and its attribution to the reign of Edward VI. The boards were derived from oak trees felled after 1541 in the eastern Baltic (significantly, see below).[fn14]

Previously it was considered that the painting could have been commissioned as early as 1547 when Edward VI succeeded his father (Fig. 5), coinciding with [pg88]Sir John Gresham taking office as Lord Mayor of London. But the records of the Privy Council under Lord Protector Somerset require a different conclusion. In that year a detailed account is given of the actions of Protestant reformers who had replaced the Rood and displayed the ‘Armes of the Kings Majeste painted’ (sic), offering the excuse to the Council that the Crucifix and other images were so decayed that they fell apart. Their unauthorised actions were seen as so serious that the punishment considered was imprisonment in the Tower of London. In the light of their repentance, this sentence was remitted, but a pardon was dependent on immediate erection of a new image of the Crucifix or at least ‘summe paynture representing the crucifix’.[fn15]

[fg]jpg|Fig. 5 Portrait of Edward VI (c.1547) wearing the Order of the Garter with
Royal Arms in the background. (© National Portrait Gallery London, reproduced with permission.)|Image[/fg]

Following Somerset’s removal in 1549, the Privy Council came under the control of the reformers and power passed into the hands of the Duke of Northumberland [pg89]for the remainder of Edward VI’s short reign. With the young King an enthusiastic reformer (although there was no legislation to enforce the display of Royal Coats of Arms until the Restoration of Charles II) c.1550/1 seems the likely time for a decision to replace the Roods against the background of extreme iconoclasm.16 Gresham influence had continued to grow and Sir John’s nephew was now coming to the fore, displaying undoubted financial talents in service of The Crown. Correspondence shows his close connection with Northumberland even at the cost of his relationship with his uncle. Thomas Gresham has been described as [pg90]a Protestant, a friend of John Foxe.[fn17] He was equally well placed to commission Westerham’s painting and as well as paintings for the London churches with which the family were associated. Whoever took the initiative, Gresham involvement seems to have been evident at this very early stage in the introduction of a dramatic statement of Royal Supremacy in English churches that continued over the centuries to come.

Counter Reformation; the significance of the triangular pediment

Only a couple of years elapsed before the accession of Queen Mary I in 1553 led to the re-appearance of Roods or of hurriedly created paintings on canvas of the Crucifixion. Royal Coats of Arms had to be re-sited elsewhere in churches. In spite of his Protestant sympathies that caused initial problems, Thomas Gresham’s expertise and reputation in mainland Europe that had proved so indispensable previously in helping to restore England’s finances, remained just as vital for the new monarch. A friendly relationship was established with Queen Mary, securing the Gresham position for the time being and ensuring stability for their estates in troubled times. However, further implications of the changed religious climate for Westerham can deduced from the triangular pediment that must have been added at this point, also painted on oak but on much thinner boards than on the main panel and differing also in the paint used. In 1931, Torr noted ‘the roundel bears on a dark green background, the Gothic letters i h s in gold, outlined with red. This is also an interesting and unusual feature – the depiction of a religious symbol along with Royal Arms’.

It seems logical that the pediment was added with the religious inscription signifying ‘Jesus’ in Greek when the Royal Coat of Arms was sited elsewhere in the church, remaining attached after restoration to its central location on the screen with Queen Elizabeth’s accession. This accords with the religious sympathies of Sir John Gresham who did not share his nephew’s views. While he had supported actively the establishment of Henry VIII’s Royal Supremacy over the Church of England his religious beliefs remained Catholic, as evidenced by the splendour of his funeral ceremonies recorded by his contemporaries.[fn18]

A Burgundian Heritage?

While identification of the earliest paintings of Royal Coats of Arms in English churches has focused attention on Rushbrooke in Suffolk and Westerham in Kent, a likely source of inspiration for the style adopted in the Church of St Mary the Virgin and elsewhere could be traced back to the times of medieval chivalry in the previous century. In 2018 after the successful completion of the conservation project, a visit by the author to the Low Countries led to a chance encounter with an earlier example of English royal heraldry, a painting in Bruges Cathedral.

Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, in deciding to renew the old alliance with England in his rivalry with France, married Margaret of York in 1468 in a sumptuous wedding near Bruges. Keen to strengthen the relationship (with growing ambitions to recreate a ‘Middle Kingdom’) Charles sent ambassadors to England in the following year to invest his brother-in-law Edward IV,[fn19] with the Order of the Toison d’ Or. Symbolism of this second most famous medieval order of chivalry derived from the commercial basis that underlay the wealth [pg91]and cultural achievements of the Netherlands – the valuable trade in wool and textiles that provided a common bond between England and Burgundy in spite of periodic strains. In turn Charles was admitted in the same year at a Chapter held at Westminster to the Order of the Garter established by Edward III. He was then invested at Ghent by a delegation including the Garter King of Arms, with the Order’s insignia, described as bejewelled and heavy with gold.[fn20]

During the fluctuating fortunes of the turbulent period termed Wars of the Roses the Yorkist King Edward IV was forced into exile in the Low Countries in 1470­71.[fn21] Seeking support from the Duke of Burgundy to regain control of England from the Lancastrians, he reminded Charles the Bold that not only was he his brother-in-law, but that ‘they were brothers in each other’s Order’ (of Chivalry).22 Edward IV enjoyed the hospitality of the Governor of the North Netherland, Louis de Gruthuse, in whose palatial house in Bruges he stayed during part of his exile. Besides admiring his host’s library, he would have known the beautiful interior of Bruges Cathedral where the elaborately carved stalls were added in 1430. Reconstructed to commemorate a later convention of the Knights of the Golden Fleece in 1478, their individual Coats of Arms were painted on framed wooden panels displayed on the back walls of the choir stalls (Fig. 6).

[fg]jpg|Fig. 6 Choir stalls of Bruges Cathedral with Royal Arms of Edward IV on right.
(Photo: Adrian Younis.)|Image[/fg]

Prominent at one end the resplendent Royal Coat of Arms of Edward IV is enclosed [pg92]within the insignia of the Order of the Golden Fleece, bearing the inscription in French ‘Edward King of England and Lord of Ireland’ (Fig. 7). This was the work of a gifted Franco-Flemish artist, Pierre Coustain, who became Burgundian Court Painter in 1454. (It emerges that he was also responsible for another fine example of the Achievement of Edward IV.[fn23] ) Its sophistication contrasts with the simple treatment of the Yorkist leader’s Coat of Arms carved in wood in Fotheringhay Church[fn24] in Northamptonshire (Fig. 8). While Westerham’s Tudor Coat of Arms, intended to convey a message, did not require the elaborate treatment suited to a ceremonial cathedral setting, the framed painting bears a striking similarity in format to the earlier Bruges painting, which was also executed on boards (although conforming to the normal vertical construction method, since it was not free­standing). It is true that the Royal Helm (surmounted by a lion) is replaced by the Crown and yet the shield, quartered identically with the lions of England and the fleurs-de-lys of France, is simply encircled by the Order of the Garter instead of the Golden Fleece. Interestingly Charles the Bold’s stall-plate in Saint George’s Chapel, Windsor, set a style copied somewhat later by other Knights, enclosing his arms within the Garter.[fn25] Overall the evidence indicates the influence of the Northern

[fg]jpg|Fig. 7 Royal Arms of Edward IV: Bruges Cathedral. (Photo: Adrian Younis.)|Image[/fg]

[fg]jpg|Fig. 8 Royal Arms of Edward IV: Fotheringhay Church, Northamptonshire. (Photo: author.)|Image[/fg] [pg93]

Renaissance and the employment of a Netherlandish rather than an Italian artist as responsible for the early Renaissance touches detected in Westerham’s Arms by both Torr and Newman. Moreover the oak boards were imported from the eastern Baltic to Antwerp where the sapwood was seemingly removed in accordance with the statutes of the Guild of Panel and Frame Makers.

During the first half of the sixteenth century the Greshams were increasingly extending their role in both commerce and finance, while developing their involvement in the Low Countries. After serving as an apprentice to a leading London mercer and Merchant of the Staple in Calais, Richard Gresham was admitted to the freedom of the Mercers’ Company in 1507. Living chiefly in London, he was already visiting Antwerp and neighbouring towns. Letters that survive from 1520 onwards show his activities in both the Netherlands and Germany, with his services to the Crown recognised by the presentation of a gilt cup and cover from Henry VIII as a New Year gift (1531-32). His son Thomas, was admitted to the Mercers in 1543 and took over the Greshams’ commercial operations on the Continent three years later, securing a leading place for the House of Gresham (established in 1537) in Anglo-Netherlands commerce, at the same time coping with the problems of the English silver coinage. With a network of agents, he continued the long- established family export of woollen cloths to Antwerp and the importation of fine cloths, silks, luxuries such as tapestries and ‘harness’, that is the armour and weaponry needed by the Tudors. Upon his appointment as King’s Merchant or Royal Agent in 1551, Thomas lived in Antwerp at the house of his ‘very friend’ Gaspar Schetz,[fn26] who shared his interest in art.[pg94]

During his years in the Low Countries it is highly likely that Thomas Gresham would have seen, or at least learnt about through these connections, the Achievement of Edward VI in Bruges. Bruges had indeed supported a long- established community of merchants as part of the ‘English Nation’ or Merchant Adventurers of the Low Countries, which had been in Edward’s time under the governorship of William Caxton. Caxton as a mercer had successfully negotiated renewal of a treaty concerning the wool trade (1468) before perhaps becoming secretary to Margaret of York and then launching into his new career in printing in Bruges. Although no documentation has been found to date, the Gresham involvement (if not possible initiative) in introducing Netherlandish style framed paintings of the Tudor Royal Coats of Arms must point to Thomas rather than his uncle who remained attached to his more conservative religious views, as we have seen. At this time, his activities as Royal Factor meant that he was close to the centre of developments in London; he recorded numerous crossings between the capital and Antwerp. Throughout his life he continued to favour artists from the Netherlands for portraits, including the fine pair of seated studies of himself and his wife (acquired by the Rijksmuseum) executed c.1560 by Anthonis Mor Van Dashorst.[fn27]

Conceivably then we owe a debt to Sir Thomas Gresham for the framed and painted Royal Coats of Arms (whether initially created in Antwerp or London) that have remained a distinctive feature of churches in Kent and throughout England under successive dynasties, alongside his well-remembered foundation of the Royal Exchange and Gresham College. The Greshams can be seen as contributing to the transition between medieval and modern times in more ways than one.

This article is dedicated to the memory of the late Treve Rosoman, F.S.A., former Curator of the Architectural Study Collection, English Heritage. He supported the author’s original ‘Gresham Thesis’, negotiated the English Heritage Research Report and took an active part in progressing the highly regarded 2013 restoration project undertaken so meticulously by Susan Moore, FBAPCR, of Plowden and Smith.[pg95][pg96]

[fn]1|V.J.B Torr, 1931, ‘The Royal Arms at Westerham’, Archaeologia Cantiana, XLIII, 285-94.[/fn]

[fn]2|The Royal Arms installed after the Restoration disappeared during the Victorian remodelling of the church. From the Churchwardens’ books it is evident that ‘ye King’s Arms’ were painted and framed locally in 1662 at a total cost of £5 6s.[/fn]

[fn]3|J. Newman, 2012, Kent: West and the Weald, Buildings of England, Yale University Press, p. 638.[/fn]

[fn]4|There remain doubts about the authenticity of Henry VIII’s Arms displayed on the rood beam in Saint Nicholas Church, Rushbrooke and, in any case, the treatment is different. Set against the tympanum, the Tudor Coat of Arms is flanked by the Welsh dragon and the Beaufort hound together with the Tudor emblems of the Rose and Portcullis, all separately carved, in contrast to the framed painting in Westerham intended to be the focal point on the rood screen.[/fn]

[fn]5|The author’s attention was kindly drawn by Dr Tarnya Cooper, then of the National Portrait Gallery, to another early but highly modified survival. In St Mary’s Church, Preston, Suffolk, there is an Elizabethan Triptych, with the central panel displaying the Royal Arms probably cut down from a rectangular board. Originally it represented the Arms of Edward VI and still shows his personal emblem of a Sun in Splendour but with his monogram overpainted.[/fn]

[fn]6|H.M. Cautley, 1934, Royal Arms and Commandments in our Churches, Norman Adlard, pp. 16, 25-26. Cautley interprets the inscriptions as ‘Long live the King, guardian of the law’ with (below the Arms) ‘O Lord save the King’ from ‘D (omi)ne Salvum fac regem’. The question remains as to who decided on additions which do not carry through to later reigns, whereas there was continuity with the royal mottoes of the Order of the Garter and of Richard the Lionheart’s battle-cry ‘God and my right’. Certainly, one can point to a Gresham link to Archbishop Cranmer, who had benefited from the family’s loan support and this may explain the source of the additions. See also note 8.[/fn]

[fn]7|Updated condition reports on both the Edward VI and George III Arms were generously provided by Susan Moore (Senior Paintings Restorer, Plowden and Smith). Her later comprehensive Treatment Reports can be consulted in the volume displayed inside Saint Mary’s bell tower where the Coats of Arms have been re-sited in secure conditions. Sources of financial help on the project are also given. Treve Rosoman commented not only on the comprehensive nature of the condition reports but also on the highest standards achieved in the conservation programme which revealed important new features including the techniques and colours employed as well as establishing the different character of the pediment.[/fn]

[fn]8|After the Coronation it was agreed between the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Crown that the Church of England can authorise the display of Royal Coats of Arms but needs royal permission to introduce them into stained glass windows. A thorough investigation failed to find any legal requirement to display the Royal Arms before the reign of Charles II. Cautley (op. cit., p. 17) deduced from prosecution statements at the trial of Archbishop Cranmer for heresy in 1556 that he was held directly responsible for the policy of removal of the ‘Arms of Christ’ and their replacement with the Royal Arms.[/fn]

[fn]9|Among many benefactions, his generosity would be shown by the establishment of Gresham’s School in Holt, Norfolk – the original family home. He probably supported the successful efforts of his brother Richard (d.1549) in securing the grant as hospitals by Henry VIII and Edward VI of St Mary’s, St Bartholomew’s and St Thomas’.[/fn]

[fn]10|John Guy, 2019, Gresham’s Law: The Life and World of Queen Elizabeth I’s Banker, Profile Books, London. This masterly reappraisal of Thomas Gresham’s career replaces the idealised biography by the Victorian historian, J.H.W. Burgon, but in spite of personal flaws, Professor Guy characterises him as the first high priest of market economics, close to the side of successive Tudor monarchs. Both the Old and New editions of the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography contain valuable information on the Gresham family.[/fn]

[fn]11|Henry Ellis, 1827, Original Letters illustrative of English history, 3rd ser., i, pp. 232-8. Early Gresham involvement in artistic activity is documented in a letter from Richard Gresham to Cardinal Wolsey (14 Oct 1520) responding to his request to secure foreign workers to make tapestries for 18 rooms in Hampton Court. Similar commissions were undertaken for the King.[/fn]

[fn]12|Tarnya Cooper, 2012, Portrait Painting and the Urban Elite of Tudor and Jacobean England and Wales, Yale University Press. Thomas Gresham almost certainly commissioned this painting when he was in Antwerp in 1544. Among the earliest full-length portraits, this format was rare elsewhere in Europe except for royal sitters. Artistic and scientific evidence support the conclusion.[/fn]

[fn]13|Among other sources of help, guidance was kindly given by John Newman, English Heritage (Treve Rosoman) the National Portrait Gallery (Dr Tarnya Cooper and Dr Charlotte Bolland) and the College of Heralds (Robert Noel) besides the Librarians of the Society of Antiquaries, Lambeth Palace, Mercers Company, British Library and Courtauld Institute and Kent County Libraries.[/fn]

[fn]14|Ian Tyers, 2014, ‘Royal Coat of Arms for Edward VI, from the Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Westerham, Kent, Dendrochronological Analysis of Oak Boards’, Research Report Series 30-2014 English Heritage. Tyers also established relationships with other paintings on oak boards from the Eastern Baltic, for example de Jongh’s Old London Bridge in the Kenwood collection and Holbein’s Henry VIII at Petworth House[/fn]

[fn]15|J.R. Dasent et al. (eds), 1890-1964, Acts of the Privy Council of England NSII, 1547-50, pp. 25-27.[/fn]

[fn]16|Eamon Duffy, 1992, The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, c.1400-c.1580, Yale University Press.[/fn]

[fn]17|John Foxe, 1641, edition, Acts and Monuments. In this reprint of the ‘Book of Martyrs’, there is prefaced an outline of his life now generally attributed to his younger son, Simeon (1569-1642). There is a list of supporters and friends from all levels of Elizabethan Society, among whom is numbered Sir Thomas Gresham with leading Citizens of London ‘who had him in great account and esteem’. Foxe is recorded as receiving their financial help for his work with the poor. Other instances of Gresham’s Protestant sympathies, discreetly concealed in Queen Mary’s reign, are given by Professor Guy (op. cit.), pp. 164-165. Thomas’ father had been an open supporter of Cranmer, actively involved in the removal of images from St. Paul’s Cathedral to meet the wishes of the archbishop.[/fn]

[fn]18|John Stow 1720, A survey of the cities of London and Westminster, 2 vols, London, 1, pp. 258-9. Dr Nicholas Harpsfield, chosen by Sir John to give the sermon, was instrumental as Cardinal Pole’s Vicar General in launching the Marian heresy hunting campaign. Three masses were sung on the second day of his elaborate funeral.[/fn]

[fn]19|Peter J. Begent and Hubert Chesshyre, 1999, The Most Noble Order of the Garter, Spink, London, pp. 158-159, 231-232.[/fn]

[fn]20|Joan Evans, 1952, ‘The Garter of Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy’, The Antiquaries Journal, xxxii, pp. 71-72.[/fn]

[fn]21|C.L. Scofield, 1923, The Life and Reign of Edward IV, 2 vols, London, p. 566.[/fn]

[fn]22|Statuts de l’Ordre de la Toison d’Or, 1481-86, Bruges. In this earliest copy of the Order’s Statutes preserved in the British Library (Harley 6199), there are not only the portraits of the Dukes of Burgundy but also the coats of arms of members including Edward IV (f.70) at the time when the Habsburg family provided the Order’s Sovereign. Notwithstanding the change of the English monarchy from Yorkist to Tudor, Henry VII and the future Henry VIII were admitted to the Order.[/fn]

[fn]23|In a painting acquired by the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (inv. SK-A-4641), Pierre Coustain executed the Arms (with the lion facing to the right) in oil on panel in 1481 for Saint John’s Church, s’Hertogenbosch.[/fn]

[fn]24|In the beautiful restored pulpit of oak given by Edward IV to Fotheringhay Church, his Royal Arms are carved and painted on the back panel below the double tester with a black bull of Clare and a white lion of March as supporters.[/fn]

[fn]25|W. St.John Hope, 1901, The Stall Plates of the Knights of the Garter, pl. LXXV. On display in the present Chapel of Saint George, commenced by Edward IV, the Duke’s brass stall plate is engraved and enamelled with the arms seen on the shield in Fig. 7., enclosed within the motto of the Order of the Garter (which has suffered some past damage).[/fn]

[fn]26|Professor Guy (op. cit.) details the importance of the Schetz banking family to Thomas Gresham’s operations. Gaspar was the son of the banking dynasty’s founder and likely to have introduced him in 1546 to the leading artists in Antwerp. Gresham’s appreciation of art led not only to his own striking portrait but to later paintings imported into England. Timber from the Baltic featured among other imports. Schetz was appointed Royal Factor to Emperor Charles V who headed the House of Habsburg until his abdication in 1555 and was thus Sovereign of the Order of the Golden Fleece.[/fn]

[fn]27|Catalogue of Paintings, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam. No. 1673 BI, p. 215. Gresham’s con­noisseurship can be seen again in the masterly portraits of himself and his wife (c.1563) that passed from the collection of Sir Robert Walpole to Catherine the Great before acquisition by the Rijksmuseum in 1931. Born in Utrecht in 1519, the artist was also known as Antonio Moro and had been Court Painter to Philip II of Spain.[/fn]