The Tomb of Lady Constantia

 

A detail of the tomb of Lady Constantia

During my brief exploration of St. Leonard's church in Scarcliffe, Derbyshire, during the Heritage Open Days festival, I discovered many features that appealed to my interests in standing buildings archaeology, but the church is probably best known for its effigy of Lady Constantia, who is assumed to have been a member of the de Frecheville family.

 

A general view

Legend says that Lady Constantia lost her way in the nearby forest and that, attracted by the curfew bell at the church, reached the village before subsequently dying with her new born son John, but left five acres of land to generate an income to pay for the curfew to be rung in perpetuity.

 

Lady Constantia with John and a lion for a pillow

In Pevsner’s very brief description of a ‘beautiful C13 effigy’, the date of her death is given as 1175, with the Historic England listing description adding that she has “a child in her arms, her head resting on a lion, with a huge scroll of Leonine verse. 

 

A detail of the lion

The Victorian historian Dr. John Charles Cox, who was considered very reputable and has been cited by the Corpus of Romanesque Sculpture when describing the Norman elements of the church, describes the effigy in his Notes on the Churches of Derbyshire (1875) as "doubtless of the Early English period". 

 

A detail of Lady Constantia and John

During my investigation of mediaeval churches in and around South Yorkshire over the past six years, I have encountered very many mediaeval effigies that are mainly made in alabaster – a soluble gypsum rock – but I have also seen several made in dolomitic limestone from the Permian Cadeby Formation, which is the same stone used for Lady Constantia’s tomb. 

 

The dog at Lady Constantia's feet

As a geologist with a specialist interest in building stone, I have seen how these materials weather when exposed to the elements on the exterior of the building and when protected in the interior of a church. Using sensitive techniques, cleaning and conservation was undertaken in 2007, which may have removed its patina, but I didn't see anything to make me think that the condition of the stone is not consistent with the c.1200 date assigned to it. 

 

A record of the conservation work

When subsequently undertaking online research, I was therefore surprised to read a report in the Church Monuments Society journal by Sophie Oosterwijk and Sally Badham, which asserts that it is in far too good a condition to be so old and, based on various other observations, came to another very different conclusion - that it is probably not a grand medieval tomb at all, but a post-medieval forgery by an unknown sculptor. 

A view looking along the effigy