This beautiful and interesting effigy now lies at the north side of the chancel on a raised tomb between two female figures, one of stone, the other of wood. The former is evidently contemporary with our knight, though both may have been his wives. It is quite possible that these figures are not in their original position, as the tomb has obviously been altered to accommodate them. The knight wears a skull-cap of metal under the coif of mail which is secured with a plain fillet and tied up at the right side with an arming-point. The hands are joined in prayer on the breast and the wrists are fastened with laces tied at the sides. The quilted breeches, or chausses gamboiseux, cover the knee-caps as is the case in the effigy of Sir Richard Goldsborough iv. at Goldsborough. The feet, to which rowel-spurs are attached, rest upon an exceptionally fine lion. The quillons are straight, and the sword-belt is attached to the scabbard with interlocking thongs and dependent sennit knot. The shield is supported by a guige fastened in front with a square buckle, and is charged with a lion rampant. The arms of Everingham are gules a lion rampant vair,1 but there are other examples where heraldic bearings are only partly expressed by the carver.2

This effigy has several points of similarity with the Goldsborough effigy mentioned above3 and may perhaps be even more closely compared with one in the church of Kirby Fleetham in the North Riding. Both belong to the York school, and remembering the fact that both the Everinghams and their predecessors the Birkins originated from that county it is not to be wondered at that this, as well as the female effigy which accompanies it, should have been the work of York craftsmen. We may dismiss, as in the highest degree improbable, the suggestion that they could have been made in France:4 needless to say, there is in existence no French effigy of this type.

Sir Adam de Everingham, to whom the earlier effigy described may perhaps be assigned, died in 1280. His son and successor, Sir Robert, in 1287.5 He was followed by Adam, afterwards Sir Adam de Everingham ii., who was only eight years of age at the time of his father’s death. He held the family estates for the remark­ably long period of fifty-four years, dying before May 8th, 1341. During his long life he played no inconsiderable part in the affairs of the country, serving with distinction in the Scottish wars and receiving a summons to Parliament, March 4th, 1308/9, as a baron. There can hardly be any reasonable doubt that this effigy represents this great baron. It is equally certain that it was set up before his death. The date is possibly about 1335, at the time of the death of his second wife, shortly after which he entailed Laxton upon his son Sir Adam de Everingham iii.6 He married twice (1) 12th January, 1307/8, Clarice, the mother of his children, who was living in 1321: (2) before the end of 1326 Margaret, widow of John Davile of Egmanton. The wooden effigy7 which lies beside him is of considerably earlier date, whilst the stone effigy is doubtless that of his second wife, who was living February, 1333/4, but predeceased him.


It is lucky that we have Stothard’s drawings of this very interesting effigy, as an unfortunate “restoration” in recent years has destroyed several of its best features. The head rests on the usual double cushion and a round-topped and slightly ridged bascinet is worn over the coif of mail: the leather cap worn be­tween the two shows distinctly below the lower edge of the bascinet. Below the hauberk the edge of the ganibeson may be seen, but no quilting is visible. The knee­caps are now quite plain, but when Stothard made his drawings they were shown to be reinforced with highly ornamental metal plates. The feet rest on a lion and rowel spurs are worn. The hands joined in prayer, are encased in articulated gauntlets of cuir-bouilli. The sword-belt is fastened to the scabbard with inter­locking thongs, a method of attachment which was becoming old-fashioned at the time this effigy was made, though it is found as late as 1340. The shield has been carved with the arms of Whatton, argent six crosslets gules and a bend sable charged with three besants, though of course the colours are no longer to be seen.

Sir Richard de Whatton, the subject of this effigy, was a man of considerable importance in the county from 1307 to 1326, and his name occurs almost con­tinuously in the appointment of justices and collectors of lay-subsidies8. The name of his wife Agnes also occurs and she appears to have been a daughter and heir of John Palmer of Nottingham.9 Though so high in favour with Edward II., he seems to have fallen under a cloud in the reign of his successor and we no longer meet with his name in the commissions. He and his son Robert de Whatton were arraigned for certain violent trespasses and assaults and heavily fined: they received the king’s pardon in 1332.10 Sir Richard seems to have lived a few years longer for he gave evidence at an in­quisition of proof of age of James Lord Audley in 1336.11 If the effigy was erected at the time of his death be must have died about this date.


This effigy has been deliberately defaced and retains little of its original detail. The head has almost gone but it has rested on a double cushion. The girdle and sword-belt are plain, but the method of attachment of the latter cannot be determined. Both feet have gone: the surcoat reaches to the middle of the calf. The genouillères appear to have been somewhat globular. There are features in this effigy of considerable interest; demi-jambarts of metal or cuir-bouilli, probably the latter, are shown as worn over the mail as reinforcements to it. These additions do not often occur on effigies before 1340, but they were actually worn in battle some years earlier. Thoroton’s illustration appears to represent a knight wearing the “re­inforced-mail” type of equipment such as that worn, for instance, by Sir Robert de Steveton at Kildwick-in­Craven. This is one of the few effigies which show the knight wearing ailettes. On brasses these curious appendages, the purpose of which has not been deter­mined, are depicted behind the shoulders. Here, as also at Ingleby Arncliffe, Yorks., and Maltby, Lincs., they take the form of flat plates at the sides of the shoulders, and would probably be ornamented (as at Ingleby Arncliffe) with the knight’s arms. The size, l2in. by 6in., is almost identical with those at Maltby.12

The knight’s shield in Thoroton’s drawing is adorned with the arms of Caltoft, a fact which leaves little doubt as to the correct identification. There is however, no indication of the charge having been carved on the shield. In all probability the knight represented is Sir John Caltoft, whose wife Agnes, inherited one moiety of the manor of East Bridgford in 1317. But it may have been set up when the church was enlarged (1320-1340).


This, the southernmost effigy in the south aisle, is a very interesting effigy of late date. Unfortunately it has suffered much from centuries of neglect. The head, which once rested on a pair of cushions, has been completely worn away. This would be protected by a bascinet with camail attached to it. The uncharged shield is borne by a guige and buckled to the arm with two straps or enarms. The left hand holds the scabbard whilst the right grasps the hilt of the sword, an attitude usually associated with effigies of an earlier type.13 Coudiéres fastened over the mail with straps are worn; The hands are encased in articulated gauntlets. The surcoat of the earlier effigies has given place to a closely-fitting skirted jupon, scalloped round the lower edge and showing the mail hauberk beneath it. The jambs dovering the lower limbs whether of plate or cuir-bouilli, are laced up the sides.14 Though much worn it seems that sollerettes of plate covered the feet; to these rowel spurs are strapped.

Identification is difficult owing to the fact that Sir Adam de Everingham ii is the only head of the family who died between 1287 and 1371, whilst the church contains two effigies which lie well between these two dates. Assuming that the effigy previously described belongs to Sir Adam ii, it can only be suggested that this is the monument of one of his brothers, several of whom were knights of importance. In any case the effigy must be assigned to the decade 1340-1350, whether it belongs to an Everingham or to a knight of some other family.


This effigy lies in a recess in the north wall of the north chapel. It is strikingly similar to the one last described and both have had the mail expressed in gesso. It would not perhaps be unreasonable to suppose that both were the work of a Nottingham school preserving the traditions of the maker of the figures at Willoughby and Norwell. Rather more of the head of the Tuxford effigy survives, showing the camail hanging over the jupon in front. The sword-belt is ornamented with cinqfoils and the upper limbs appear to be clad in chausses-gamboiseux. The other features are identical with those of the Laxton figure.

John de Lexington, the last of the lords of Tuxford of that family which derives its name from Laxton, or Lexington, died leaving his sister Cecilia, wife of Richard de Marcham his heir. Her son Robert de Marcham left three daughters and cobeirs, the eldest of whom, Berta, married William Longvilliers. This Lord of Tuxford died before February 25th, 1341/2, and is probably the original of this monument.

(1) Sir Adam de Everingham, de Goules a vn lion rampaund de veer.” Parl Roll. 129: also in Charles’s Roll. 307.
(2) As for instance the effigy of Sir Thomas de Wendisley at Bakewell, Derbyshire, and that of Sir Geoffrey de Hotham at East Harlsey, Yorkshire.
(3) Described and illustrated by Mr. W. M. I’Anson in the Yorks. Arch. Soc. Journal, xxvii. 117.
(4) Thor. Soc. Trans. vii. One wonders on what grounds the stone from which these effigies are carved is stated to have been quarried in France.
(5) Inq. p.m. Thursday before the Festival of St. Bartholemew, 15 Ed. i.
“et dicunt quod Adam filius predicti ‘Roberti’ est propinquus beres ejus. et quod est de etate vij annorum ad festum Sancti Michaelis proximo futurum.” (Complete Peerage Ed. vicary Gibbs.).
(6) The entail was made c.1334, and in 1338 he made a further conveyance of his lands at Laxton and Everingham.
(7) Illustrated, Fryers’ Wooden Monumental Effigies. Fig. 4. Plate II.. and dated by him 1290.
(8) Cal. Pat. Rolls.
(9) Inq. p.m. of Alice, wife of James Palmer, July 20, 8 Ed. iii.
(10) Cal. Pat. Rolls.
(11) Inq. 9 Ed. iii.
(12) Assoc. Arch. Soc. Papers, xxx, 367.
(13) Dr. Mann, of the Wallace Collection, to whom the writers are indebted for much valuable help, states that the loosely hung “great” sword-belt and cingulum with the sword-handling attitude are seldom found after the first quarter of the century.
(14) Dr. Mann calls attention to a similar arrangement on the semi­effigial monument of Sir John Daubigny at Norton Brize, who died in 1346.