Notices of an English Branch of the Malet Family (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1885 Excerpt: ...Mr. Farbrother in his History of Shepton Mallet, page 64, thus describes them as then existing; excepting as to the site the description is perfectly accurate at the present day; at page 64 he writes: "The mutilated effigies of two knights traditionally reported to be two of the Malet family, who were engaged in the crusade to the Holy Land in the time of Henry II, are all that remain of monuments of archaeological interest; they are coeval with the earlier portions of the church, and exhibit fine specimens of sculpture of the period. The figure in the north aisle is clad in chain mail and surcoat; the right arm is extended and rests upon a long heatershaped shield, which, suspended by a guige or strap, is borne upon the left arm; the legs are crossed, and the scabbard of the sword is visible between the broken feet. The figure in the south aisle has similar accoutrements, the legs crossed, and the feet rest upon a lion; a naked sword with the point upwards lies on the right side. "According to the rules of heraldry, those who died in battle of the victorious party were represented with their swords naked, the points upward on the right side, and their shields on their left, with their helmets on their heads." I see no reason to call in question the truth of the tradition that the tomb and the effigies were of members of the Malet family; both towns were the property of the Malets for four generations after Gilbert Malet the contemporary of William the Conqueror; they were men of great rank and possessions, and would naturally bestow such honour as was customary on their relatives who died in the Holy Land; and their own tombs would also be of more than common magnificence. Their successors also were men of rank and consequence, so that if th...