68 PROCEEDINGS AT MEETINGS OF

orle around his helmet ; on his surcoat appear three Hons, according to Cough's description (Sep. ilon. voL i. part 2. ]). 170.) Lcland mentions, in his Itinerary, two or three tombs of tlie Bruces at rickering, one of whom witli his wife lay in a chapel on the south side of the choir ; " he had a garland about his helmet ; " this description seems to identify the tomb with that now removed to the north side of the chancel.* It was still in the south chantry when Gough visited the church in 1785 ; but that chapel has been converted into a vestry, and the tomb displaced. Another tomb, described by Leland as in a chapel under an arch on the north side of the choir, was probably that of which the mutilated remains are now seen on the south side of the communion table, where it had been placed previously to Cough's visit, and tlic chapel destroyed. The more ancient efHiry is not described by Leland, who, however, speaks of seeing " two or three tumbes of the Bruses, and this may be the third thus adverted to in his Itinerary. Cough describes it as a cross-legged figure on an altar-tomb against the north wall, in a round helmet with a frontlet, gorget of mail, plate armour, round elbow-pieces, mail a])ron and greaves ; on the shield a chief dancetty. Tlicre was a branch of the Bruce family settled at Pickering ; and Leland states that he saw tlie ruins of a manor- place there, called Bruce's Hall. These effigies claim the attention of the Yorkshire antiquary, and deserve to be carefully examined and identified. The Rev. Edward Trollope gave the following account of the recent discovery of a mural painting in Lincolnshire, and exhibited coloured drawings, carefully executed when this curious work of art was first brought to light : —

• ' During the process of cleaning down the walls of Uanceby (Hiurch,

near Sleaford, preparatory to their being fresh painted, so as to shew the stonework in the interior, portions of an older coating of ])Iaster were dis- covered below the more modern surface, which was condemned. It aj)pears that the walls had been prepared in so slovenly a manner for the reception of this second coating, that whenever any portions of the first still remained in a tolerably sound state, these were allowed to remain, although wholly concealed by the new work above them, until they were once more separated in my presence by a skilful workman, who, having discovered renuiantsof painting, in conse(iuence of the ilaking otf of a portion of the upper sinfacc, carefully removed the remainder, bo as to disclose the figure represented by the drawing which I send for examination. It formed a part of a sul>ject 20 feet in length, and .~) feet in breadtii, enclosed by a red band or frame, and was painted in distemper upon tlie wall of the north aisle ; but the only portion remaining perfect, or indeed intelligible, was one extremity (to the right), which is the subject of my drawings. Wiien first the object Bccmingly rcHcmbling a i>ag caught my eye, 1 hastily imagined that the figure was that of .Judas, and that the curious tufted monster was intended to portray the instigator of his betrayal ; Imt n]Mm ol)^^erving the noble character ho strongly Ktamj)e(l upon tlie countenance of this holy ])erson by the artist, and after due consideration, I believed him to be St. Matthew, who, when painted as an Apostle, has usually a |iurse or bag in his hand, whilst the Book seemed to point to his character as an hlvangelist, or Cospel wiiter, bv the power (jf which the I>cvil was to be aliased. The dress is '• Lclaii.l, llill. V..1. i. Inl. 71