oubled period between 1640 and 1660, but if it had been
open to view in the earlier of these years it is not likely that all
recollection of it would have passed so quickly away. We must remember
too that this monument is more perfect than most others in the
cathedral; and that they suffered, as we have already told, the greatest
damage in early Protestant times. It seems, therefore, only reasonable
to suppose that this most gorgeous of all had been already hidden and
protected. So universal was destruction then and earlier, that in the
second year of her reign Queen Elizabeth found it necessary to issue a
stringent proclamation "against breakinge or defacing of monuments of
Antiquitie, being set up in Churches or other publique places for memory
and not for superstition."

The bishop's effigy lies, where it was found, on a high tomb with
panelled sides, each having seven recesses separated by tiny buttresses.
The canopy, ogee-shaped above, and with a plain elliptical arch below,
was much mutilated, but seems to have been crocketed and terminated by a
finial. It owes its present form to Mr. Cottingham, who restored it in
1840.

[Illustration: TOMB OF BISHOP JOHN DE SHEPPEY
(FROM A PHOTOGRAPH BY J. L. ALLEN).]

The effigy itself has been much praised, and deservedly. The sculpture,
in stone, is excellent, and the colours have a fine effect. It is
surprising to see how general is the belief that this is "probably the
most perfect specimen of ancient colouring now existing in England," and
how even great authorities refer to "its very perfect original
colouring;" for in the "Gentleman's Magazine" (September, 1825) we can
read how the monument was treated just after its discovery. A Mr.
Harris, in Mr. Cottingham's employ, made two drawings of the effigy, one
showing it as it was, the other as the architect thought it had been.
The restoration of the colours, according to the second drawing, was
then resolved on and carried out, and, as a result, "the dalmatic,
instead of being a pink, is now a dull scarlet, with a _green lining_,
and the shoes are painted _yellow_." Matters are still worse when we see
Mr. Harris complaining (in a letter now at the British Museum) that the
renovation according to his drawing was done "by an unskilful hand,
consequently the remains of the beautiful colouring were destroyed,
which was much regretted by the dean, Dr. Stevens, at the time." The
sculpture seems fortunately not to have been tam