Page:A record of European armour and arms through seven centuries (Volume 5).djvu/59

 described as being "In the Hall of the Leiftenn't of the Tower, upon a like horse, one Curasseer Armour richly guilt and engraven, made for his late Majestie, of ever blessed memorye, Charles the first. The horse Furniture being one shaffrone of the same and an old saddle." In the 1676 inventory there is again the mention of a gilded suit "upon a like horse Curazeer Armour richly guilt and engraven w^{th} a pair of Graves made for King Charles y^e ^{st} the Horse furniture being a shaffron of the same." To the horse armour had been added a "brestplate and buttock plaine a saddle plate, and a Bitt guilt with an old saddle." We are somewhat confused, however, by a second entry in the 1676 inventory, which refers to another suit made for Charles I: "Armour Cappape richly guilt and graven made for King Charles y^e ^{st} w^{th} Gauntlett and Shaffron of the same and guilt steele for a sadle," which would as well describe the suit under discussion as the other entry. This leaves us in some perplexity, which is increased by the fact that the 1683 inventory mentions no armour that belonged to King Charles, only a gilt "shaffron," "said to belong to King Charles the first's horse," and that in the inventory and valuation of 1688 there appears a suit of gilded armour that would seem to be the one which we are endeavouring to trace, which is described, however, as "Armour Capape Parcell Gilt made for his late Ma^{tie} K. Charles y^e II^{de}" which with velvet trapping pistol holsters and pistols which were added to it was valued at £158. So we find the Charles I suit turned into that of King Charles II, and so it remained entered in the subsequent inventories of 1691 and 1693. One solid fact emerges, we fancy, from these entries, and that is that in 1660 there was a gilded and engraved suit at the Tower which had belonged to Charles I, a suit which can be traced—in a somewhat vague fashion—down to 1693, when it appears classed as the armour of Charles II. Two explanations of this change of attribution can be suggested. Either the suit was worn by both kings, and so might reasonably be attributed to the ownership of the latter; or it being thought desirable after the death of Charles II that he should have armorial commemoration at the Tower, the most gorgeous suit of armour existing in the collection was chosen for this purpose; the suit selected happening to be the gilded armour of His Majesty's predecessor. Sir Samuel Meyrick records that the head of the figure of Charles II and the horse were carved by Grinling Gibbons in 1686, or just two years before this Charles I suit was first described as that of Charles II.

From the remarkable likeness in general outline and make which it bears to the suit already described, and credited to the workmanship of Petit of Blois, we may fairly safely accept this Charles I suit as being of French