Published in Church Monuments, 28 (2013), pp. 52-77. See www.churchmonumentssociety.org (full digital versionavailable via EBSCO)

Death or resurrection?The iconography of two sixteenth-centuryincised slabs in Oudelande (Zeeland) andother Netherlandish shroud effigies

SOPHIE OOSTERWIJK

A pair of incised effigial slabs dating from the first quarter of the sixteenth century inthe parish church of Oudelande in the coastal province of Zeeland (Netherlands)depict a husband and wife, each in their own coffin. While the wife appears to bewrapped in a very elegant sleeved shroud the husband seems to wear male civiliandress, at least at first sight: comparisons with shroud memorials elsewhere suggestthe Oudelande couple may both be presented in sleeved shrouds. Of particularinterest is a cluster of late-medieval shroud slabs of different styles in nearbyKapelle. Other comparable examples can be found elsewhere in the Netherlands, allof them Flemish imports. Analysis of these shroud memorials is used here to addressstill commonly held assumptions about the appearance, definition and meaning ofso-called transi or cadaver effigies.

The two incised slabs of Belgian hardstone in the church of StEloy (Eligius) in the village of Oudelande on the Zuid-Beveland peninsula in the province of Zeeland (see map) arealready familiar to scholars. They were published by FrankGreenhill in 1976, but only one was illustrated andunfortunately Greenhill misread the abbreviated name‘Corneliszoon’ as just ‘Cor’.1 Both slabs were newlyphotographed, measured and described for the MeMO (MedievalMemoria Online) project on 31 May 2012 (Figs 1a–b).2 The slabscommemorate a husband and wife. They are nowadays situated

side by side in the chancel floor (Fig. 1c), with that of thewife placed on the right, i.e. on her husband’s left side – atraditional juxtaposition that we also often find in paintedmarital portraits: the overall composition of both slabssuggests that they were meant to be juxtaposed in this way.

The wife’s slab is far better preserved than the husband’s,probably because it was once covered up or situated in a lessexposed position.3 However, the marginal inscriptions on bothare clearly legible. His text reads:

Hier leet / begraven Cristoffel Corneliszoon diesterf / anno MVc ende / XXI. den .XVten. dach in April.(Here lies buried Cristoffel Corneliszoon, who died in the year 1521 on the15th day in April.)

It is the wife’s epitaph that specifies the relationshipbetween the two deceased:

Hier leet / begraven Mariken Cristoffel Corneliszoonhuis / vrou sterf / anno .M.Vc. ende .XVII.den .XVIIten. dach in Meij.(Here lies buried Mariken, wife of Cristoffel Corneliszoon, died in the year1517 on the 17th day in May.)

Mariken thus predeceased her husband and her slab must havebeen com-missioned after her demise, for the beautifullycarved inscription is well set out and neatly fills the wholeof the text band, ending with the year of her death in Romannumerals in the top left corner. On Cristoffel’s slab thedecorative flourish that acts as a space filler after themention of his date of death could indicate that hisinscription was completed at a later date, which would meanthat his monument was commissioned at the same time asMariken’s while he himself was still alive, but this isdebatable: the letters are neat and evenly spaced, although itis curious that a flourish was preferred to the frequentlyoccurring abbreviation ‘bvds’ for bidt voer die siel (pray for thesoul). Irrespective of whether the two slabs were commissionedshortly after Mariken’s death or only after Cristoffel’s, theywere evidently envisaged as a pair.

The overall composition and style of the two slabs and theelegant lettering show them to be the work of one workshop or

even the same accomplished carver, for the designs have beenexecuted with confidence. Each slab features in the fourcorners the traditional quatrefoil medallions containing thesymbols of the evangelists, which are almost completelyidentical in form and execution, except for subtle differencesin the shapes of the quatrefoils in the corners, proving yetfurther that the slabs are products of the same workshop. Themain dis-tinguishing feature is the heraldic shieldbetween thefeet of the effigy on Cristoffel’s slab, from which the devicewas carefully effaced, probably in the 1790s – the fate of somany heraldic features on monuments and slabs during theFrench period in Holland when the Revolution’s stance of liberté,égalité, fraternité made any indication of aristocracy and status anabomination to the authorities.4

Another, more curious distinction lies in the respectivewidths of the two Oudelande slabs. The size of a tomb slabneed not reflect the actual dimensions of the grave on whichit was once placed: slabs can vary widely in size and smallerstones could be chosen for the sake of economy.5 In fact,eleven of the fifteen extant slabs in the church at Oudelandeare far shorter than life-size, ranging from 129 to 145 cm inlength. If this pair of slabs was produced at the same timeone would expect them to be identical in size, yet Mariken’smeasures 145 x 72 cm whereas Cristoffel’s is noticeably wider,viz. 145 x 86 cm. This could possibly mean that his actual gravewas also wider, or that his slab was meant to be more imposingby its increased width, or it could have been just coincidenceor even a workshop error. The slabs in Oudelande vary in widthbetween 62 and 98 cm, so there was evidently no standardimposed by the authorities of this church. Whatever thereason, Christoffel and Mariken appear to have been buried inseparate if adjacent graves, whereas many couples in thisperiod instead chose a joint grave with a larger slab.

Except for the shield on Cristoffel’s slab and thedifference in width, the designs mirror each other and the twoeffigial figures are quarter-turned towards one another,although not interacting otherwise. From their overallcomposition it is evident that the two slabs were intended tobe laid side by side as a pair, covering the couple’s gravesbeneath the church floor.

Appearance and dress

The most unusual aspect of the two Oudelande slabs is thatCristoffel and Mariken are each presented as if lying in anopen coffin, its depth rendered in perspective whileadditional hatching suggests shadow. Their coffin lidslikewise show perspective, albeit that the large incised crossdecorating each lid appears to be askew;6 the lids are partlyremoved to reveal the bodies within. To the viewer who regardsthe slabs in their horizontal position, the figures would thusappear to be recumbent, as if representing actual bodies intheir graves below, and one would naturally assume suchcoffined figures to represent the deceased after death. Thiswould make them examples of cadaver or transi monuments, whichcan vary in depiction, from newly dead, shrouded corpses, toputrefying or even verminous cadavers and skeletons.7 It is notsurprising, therefore, that Greenhill included the twoOudelande slabs in his chapter on the human corpse, althoughneither example is listed in Kathleen Cohen’s survey of transitombs in the middle ages and Renaissance, nor does she mentionany other shroud slabs in Zeeland among her examples for theLow Countries.8

The Oudelande slabs are not ‘macabre’ in the sense of beinggrim representations of the human corpse. In fact, the incisedeffigies are by no means typical cadaver or shroudrepresentations: only the unmistakably bare feet of Mariken’seffigy suggest that she is dressed in nothing but a shroud, aswas customary for burial at this time. Yet it is not a meresheet in which her body has been wrapped, for her shroud hassleeves, making it very different from the typical shroud witha knot at the top and bottom that we find on English monumentsand that is often open to reveal much of the naked – and evendecaying or skeletal – corpse inside. An example is the shroudbrass of John Symondes (d. 1505) and his wife Agnes in Cleynext the Sea (Norfolk), which – like the Oudelande slabs –shows the couple with their bodies still intact and turningtowards each other (Fig. 2). John and Agnes are wrapped in thetraditional knotted shrouds, which are parted across theirupper torsos but then rolled around their arms so that thecloth covers their groins, leaving bare only their lower legsand feet. Agnes’s shroud falls slightly further down thanJohn’s, but this is token decorum at best, for the open shroud

above reveals her long loose hair and her naked breasts. Thecouple’s shrouded appearance contrasts with the contemporarydress of their diminutive offspring below, and thisdistinction is further emphasised by the nine banderoles with,upside down, the words ‘Now thus’, which underline theirpresent condition.9

If the effigies of John and Agnes are meant to representcorpses, they look curiously alive: their eyes are wide open,their hands raised in prayer, and their feet are firmlyplanted on the grassy knoll below, albeit with the lower knotof the shroud rather implausibly placed beneath. The Oudelandefigures instead appear at first sight to be recumbent in theircoffins and they also show more decorum: the nakedness ofMariken’s effigy is almost completely covered, except for thebare feet and part of the face. The intriguing aspect of herface is that whereas the incised nose and mouth are stillcrisp and clear, there is no hint of the eyes, despite thefact that this part of the slab shows little wear: the resultis a rather ‘dead’, expressionless countenance that may beintentionally reminiscent of the way corpses were laid outwith their faces covered. An English comparison is themonument to Prior Rowland Leschman (d. 1491) at Hexham(Northumberland), whose sculpted effigy is presented as iflaid out for burial with the cowl drawn over the eyes, leavingonly the lower part of his face exposed. The figure is thusunable to behold the painted image of the prior kneelingbefore Christ as the Man of Sorrows on the east wall insidehis chantry chapel, yet, paradoxically, the hands are held inan attitude of prayer.10

The dress worn by the two Oudelande figures is not easilyclassified. While it must be part of the shroud, the cloththat covers the head of Mariken’s effigy looks almost like thetype of linen headdress with a long narrow tail on either sidehanging down to the shoulders that one sees in contemporaryportraits. More unusual still are the wide sleeves. Ordinarilymedieval shrouds were simply large linen winding-sheets inwhich the body was wrapped, pinned or even sewn, as medievalburial scenes in illuminated books of hours show; tailoredshrouds – or rather: burial shifts – have always been regardedas a much later development.11 There is some resemblance topenitential dress, for penitents also went barefoot, but thecoffin setting suggests a burial shroud. Without

archaeological evidence to prove that such shifts wereactually in use for burials in this period, we can only assumethat the form of shroud presented here in Oudelande was atleast recognisable to contemporary viewers because of thecontext.

Earlier parallels for Mariken’s shroud effigy can be foundin Flanders. One of the earliest is the well-known singleshroud brass of Wouter Copman (d. 1387) in St SaviourCathedral (Sint-Salvatorskathedraal) in Bruges, on which thehands and eyes are also hidden beneath the voluminous andelegantly draped winding-sheet.12 Even closer is theresemblance to the double shroud brass of Joris de Munter (d.1439) and his wife Jacquemine van der Brugghe (d. 1423) in thesame church and to that of Jacob Bave (d. 1432) and CatharinaPoltus (d. 1464) in the church of St James (Sint-Jacobskerk)in Bruges (Fig. 3).13 Here each figure also appears to bewearing a separate headcloth with one end waving across theupper chest: their eyes are likewise veiled by this samecloth, though their noses and mouths are shown. Ronald VanBelle’s inventory includes yet more incised shroud slabs withfigures dressed in similar winding-sheets with the clothdraped over the arms almost like wide sleeves, such as thedouble incised slabs of two unknown couples of c.1450 and c.1470in Nieuwpoort.14 No coffins occuron these Flemish examples, butthe figures are all shown frontally, motionless and in repose,some evidently recumbent with their heads resting on cushions,as if they have been laid out for burial. It is conceivablethat Mariken’s sleeved burial shift is a misinterpretation orvisual adaptation of these Flemish draped winding-sheets. Yetthe feet of the Flemish shroud figures are all either shod orcovered by their shrouds: none display bare feet likeMariken’s effigy.

Cristoffel’s slab is rather more worn than that of hiswife, but while his effigy is also presented in a coffin itappears at first sight to be wearing civilian clothes insteadof a shroud, viz. a long gown with sleeves as well as lapels –the latter a fashionable feature of male dress at this time.His head is uncovered and shows the standard straight haircutthat we may also observe in painted portraits and tombeffigies of the period. Unfortunately it is impossible todetect the doublet and shirt that would normally be visiblebeneath the gown, which falls open above the waist. Moreover,

although his feet do not show the carefully rendered toes thatwe see on Mariken’s effigy, we cannot be certain that his feetare shod because the slab is badly worn in this area and theleft foot is only visible in outline, while the right islargely hidden. These uncertainties raise questions. Most malecivilian effigies on contemporary incised slabs in Zeeland aredepicted in gowns that fall just below the knees.15

Cristoffel’s ankle-length gown is thus not typical of civilianmale dress at this time, yet it still looks even less like ashroud than Mariken’s.

There are parallels for differences in dress style onmedieval monuments. One example is a brass in Newington-next-Hythe (Kent), which shows Thomas Chylton (d. 1501) in a shroudand his wife Thomasine in contemporary dress, presumablybecause she outlived him: the inscription gives only Thomas’sdate of death.16 However, dress can be ambiguous and this canlead to misinterpretation. A brass in Taplow (Buckinghamshire)shows nineteen-year-old John Manfield (d. 1455) and his sisterIsabelle in contemporary fashion, whereas their littlehalfbrother John is wrapped only in a loose garment with ahood and a cross. Despite high child mortality rates one didnot commission monuments for children in their lifetime and itdefies logic why only one of three deceased siblings should beshown shrouded. I have previously argued that John wears not ashroud but a baptismal ‘chrisom’, indicating that he died inearly infancy.17 If Cristoffel’s slab was indeed commissionedafter Mariken’s death but while he himself was still living,it would explain why he is shown apparently not shrouded butfully dressed, even down to his shoes – if his feet are indeedshod. Yet some of the Flemish figures are shown shrouded withshod feet and we should consider whether Cristoffel’s longrobe is instead another variant of burial shift, albeit withthe head left uncovered. A cluster of contemporary shroudslabs in nearby Kapelle provides good comparisons to answerthis question.

Shroud slabs in Kapelle

The church of Our Lady (Onze-Lieve-Vrouwekerk) in Kapelle, asmall town also on the Zuid-Beveland peninsula and less than13 km from Oudelande (see map), contains a remarkable cluster

of medieval shroud effigies, none of which were identified assuch in an important local study.18 The earliest example is asmall shroud slab measuring 89 x 57 cm (Fig. 4).19 The epitaphreads:

Hier leet Aechte Claeis / dochter sterf intjaer .M.CCCC.LXIX. XXIIII. / dage in oegst God heb / deziele. Heden leeven en mergen doot hebt / dat vor oghen/ tis wijsheit groot(Here lies Aechte Claeisdochter, died in the year 1469 on the 24th day inAugust, God have the soul. Today life and tomorrow death, be mindful ofthat, it is great wisdom.)

Hemmed in by this marginal inscription is a small figurealmost completely wrapped in a winding-sheet that has beendraped over the head like a veil and thrown over the arms andhands, rather like the shrouded figures on the earlier brassesin Bruges. Only the face remains visible, now blank andperhaps always meant to be thus, although it is likely thatmore finely incised facial features have been worn away. Thereare no distinguishable feet: the three pointed shapes at thebottom are probably folds of the shroud.

Except for the patronym no names are given of Aechte’sparents or of a husband. It is conceivable, therefore, thatshe died in childhood. Although the small size of the slab isby itself no reliable indication for such a supposition, theappearance of the incised figure is no proof against it.Medieval monuments frequently present children more likeminiature adults than like naturalistically proportionedchildren; for example, it is impossible to gauge the age ofthe Symondes children just from their appearance on theirparents’ brass (Fig. 2).20 The verse at the end of Aechte’sepitaph may signal an early death, echoing as it does thesentiments expressed by Death and the newborn infant in con-temporary Danse Macabre poems, such as the French lines ‘[…] duiour de la naissance / Conuient chascun a mort offrir: / Folest qui nen a congnoissance’ ([…] from the day of one’s birth everyonemust give himself up to Death: a fool is he who does not recognise this) and‘Hier nasquis huy men fault aler’ (Born yesterday, today I must go).21

The shrouded figure on Aechte’s slab is slightly turned to theleft and appears to be up-right rather than recumbent, but in

dress it is reminiscent of the Flemish examples discussedearlier.

Commissioned probably soon after her death in 1469,Aechte’s slab must have been a local forerunner, for all othershroud slabs in Kapelle date from the early to mid sixteenthcentury if we take the date of death as a guide; they are alsomuch larger than Aechte’s.22 The first example is the singlememorial slab to Hubrecht Cornelis Jacopszoon (d. 1517), whichmeasures 177 x 101 cm (Fig. 5).23 The incised male effigy isdressed in an unusual garment that looks like a modern, almostcasually worn, ankle-length bath-robe, complete with lapelsand wide sleeves that are partly rolled back to reveal theforearms. It cannot be anything other than a shroud, however,because the figure appears to wear nothing underneath: thehalf-open robe reveals a bare chest, while the right side islifted to reveal the figure’s right leg and bare feet. Clearlyupright, the figure’s stance is more animated than static,with the head turned to the left and the right foot placedslightly forward; the hands are placed across the lowerabdomen, the right over the left. His hairstyle is similar tothat on the near-contemporary slab of Cristoffel Corneliszoonin Oudelande (Fig. 1a). Yet whereas the latter is now toobadly worn to judge the expression on the effigy’s face, thecarving on Hubrecht’s slab is crisp and allows us to observeone detail that seems at odds with the figure’s animatedstance: the eyes appear to be closed, not open.

The next two shroud slabs in Kapelle measure 170 x 86 cmeach and form a pair (Figs 6a–b).24 They were executed with thetechnique of taille d’épargne, whereby the stone around the incisedimage is cut away so that the figure appears to be in relief.The slabs commemorate Jan Symoenszoon (d. 10 December 1524)and his son Symoen Jan Symoenszoon (d. 13 April 1525). Withjust over four months between the two deaths, they wereprobably commissioned together after the son had died as theyare identical in size and similar in execution. Moreover, theevangelist symbols closely resemble those used on thecontemporary Oudelande slabs and on the slab of HubrechtCornelis Jacopszoon, which suggests they are all the work ofthe same workshop. The figures of Jan and Symoen are slightlyturned to each other, or so they would be if their respectivepositions had not been mistakenly reversed in 1894 when theslabs weremoved: Symoen should be on his father’s left side.25

They also almost mirror one other in their composition,including the way they wear their shrouds, albeit that theposture of Symoen’s figure is less convincing, especially theclumsily bent left leg. Jan’s effigy wears his shroud drapeddiagonally across the left shoulder, while Symoen’s shroud isdraped across the right shoulder. Jan’s face does seem older,compared to Symoen’s more youthful countenance (Fig. 6c–d),26

yet the figures show no visible difference in age otherwise:both bodies look equally fit and ageless. Particularlystriking are the differences in style between the shrouds wornby the figures on these three slabs in Kapelle. WhereasHubrecht’s is more like a robe, Jan Symoenszoon wears the moretraditional winding-sheet, except that it is draped almostlike a toga with the fabric wrapped around his left arm ratherlike a sleeve and then clinging to his legs; the shroud onSymoen’s effigy is draped in an even less plausible mannerwith part of it falling like a skirt around his legs. LikeHubrecht’s effigy, however, both Jan and Symoen are shownstanding with their eyes closed.

The largest of the shroud slabs in Kapelle is a jointmemorial, measuring 263 x 138 cm. It is somewhat worn, but theincised lines are still legible; the taille d’épargne technique hasagain been used here, but only to create a vague suggestion ofa double niche around the figures with a small moulded pendantfloating somewhat incongruously in the middle. The slabcommemorates a married couple, Cornelis Corneliszoon den OudenBoom (d. 1527) and Mariken Pieter Gheertszoonsdochter vanWemelingen (d. 1504), who may have been Cornelis’s first wife(Fig. 7a).27 The two figures are shown side by side and facingthe same direction, but the wife’s head is slightly turnedtowards her husband on her right. Reminiscent of the effigialslab of her namesake in Oudelande, the figure of Mariken iswrapped in a sleeved shroud that reveals only her face, hands,lower legs and bare feet. The almost immodest bare legs andfeet prove beyond doubt that she is indeed wearing a shroud.28

In contrast, Cornelis’s sleeved shroud with lapel-like foldssuggests a proper garment resembling that of Hubrecht CornelisJacopszoon in style; it is left partly open and thus revealsmuch more of his naked body beneath. The hands of both figuresare decorously placed across the lower abdomen and their eyesare closed (Fig. 7b), which suggests death, though this wouldseem at odds with their standing posture. In this the figures

also differ from English shroud effigies such as on theSymondes brass (Fig. 2), which have their eyes clearly open.

Possibly the latest shroud slab in Kapelle is one of moremodest size and appearance, measuring 173 x 100 cm (Fig. 8).Despite presenting a single incised female shroud figure inthe centre, the inscription on this slab actually commemoratestwo people: Stijne Lauwers (d. 1550) and a local priest andcanon, Pieter Cornelis, who was presumably her son. Stijne isdescribed in her epitaph as ‘de weduwe van den ouden Boom’ (thewidow of the old Boom), which suggests that she was the second(?)wife of Cornelis Corneliszoon den ouden Boom, who shared thejoint shroud slab with his first(?) wife Mariken discussedabove (Fig. 7a). The single effigy may indicate that PieterCornelis initially commissioned this monument for his mother;his own date of death is not given on the slab and perhaps hewas eventually buried elsewhere. The effigy shows a mournful-looking female figure enveloped in a cloaklike shroud, whichis draped over her head like a veil: an anomaly is the incisedcurved line beneath her neck, which suggests an additionalgarment or neck-cloth, whereas the bare feet below rule outthat she wears anything further. The hands are crossed overher abdomen and the eyes are closed, but the feet indicate astanding pose and there is even a suggestion of contrapposto. Stijne’s and Pieter’s joint memorial harks back to theearlier, much smaller incised shroud slab of AechteClaeisdochter in the same church and to Mariken’s inOudelande. Although Aechte’s cloaked effigy shows neitherhands nor bare feet, the comparisons with other shroud brassesand slabs in Flanders and Zeeland confirm that all threefigures are depicted wearing shrouds, not cloaks, and that theheads of female shroud figures are always covered. Male shroudeffigies in Zeeland show much greater variety in style and inthe manner of wearing shrouds, however, and this stronglysuggests that the figure on Cristoffel Corneliszoon’s slab inOudelande is wearing a shroud as well. As the examples inKapelle demonstrate, either lapels and sleeves did occur oncontemporary forms of shroud, or some artists chose to rendershrouds more elegant in this way. The garment worn by HubrechtCornelis Jacopszoon’s effigy is much more like a robe than ashroud, albeit shorter than the length of the garmentsuggested by the outline of the Oudelande figure. Part of theproblem of interpretation is the worn state of Cristoffel’s

slab, but even if his feet are shod instead of bare this neednot rule out a shroud effigy, as comparisons with some of theextant Flemish examples show (Fig. 3).29

The last example in Kapelle to be discussed is a large andelegant joint shroud slab measuring 242 x 128 cm, which isagain executed in the taille d’épargne technique but with the innerdrawing more lightly incised (Fig. 9a).30 It commemorates JacobWillem Jacobszoon, who died on 27 November 1531, and PieterJacobszoon, whose date of death was never added. The figuresstand on two small mounds and the carver has provided themwith the most elaborate setting of all, viz. a double-headedarch with Gothic tracery and finials. The figures are turnedtowards each other, but whereas Jacob’s hands are laid acrosshis lower abdomen, those of Pieter – who was a canon of thechurch in Kapelle – are raised in prayer; above the head ofPieter’s effigy is a chalice whereas Jacob has a house mark.Pieter was presumably Jacob’s son and he would thus be placedon his father’s left side, matching the original positions ofJan Symoenszoon and his son Symoen on their separate slabs.The blank space left in the inscription for Pieter’s date ofdeath indicates that the slab was commissioned in hislifetime, and probably by him: medieval priests often chose tobe commemorated together with one or both of their parents, aswas most likely also the case on the previous example (Fig.8). Despite the Gothic tracery the slab of Jacob and Pieterhas strong Renaissance overtones: the figures are graceful andanatomically convincing, and their shrouds resemble almostdiaphanous togas, albeit that Pieter’s appears to have asleeve on the right side whereas Jacob’s right arm isunmistakably bare. The hairstyles of the two figures differslightly, which gives them a degree of individuality, yetphysically they appear to be of a similar youthful age.

The effigies of Jacob and Pieter share one further featurethat sets them apart from those on all the other shroud slabsin this church: they are both presented with their eyes wideopen (Fig. 9b). Before discussing the meaning of this detail,however, it is worth taking a brief look at related slabs inthe Netherlands that will give an idea of the iconographicaldissemination of shroud imagery as well as of workshopproduction and geographical reach.

Production and spread

The concentration of shroud slabs in Kapelle is remarkable.There may well have been family preferences for such imagery,or perhaps local patrons were inspired by similar monumentselsewhere or in the same church, such as the small slab ofAechte Claeisdochter: as we know from sources elsewhere, thiswas not uncommon.31 However, the relationship between thepeople commemorated on the incised shroud slabs in this churchremains unknown: the only obvious family relation is betweenSymoen Jan Symoenszoon and Jan Symoenszoon, while CornelisCorneliszoon den ouden Boom was presumably Stijne Lauwers’shusband and Pieter Cornelis’s father.

The style and overall layout of the sixteenth-centuryshroud slabs in Kapelle – including the lettering and theformat of the evangelist symbols – suggest that they wereproducts of the same workshop: the variations in shroud typesand use of taille d’épargne may simply point to different carversor stylistic developments over time. The exception is Aechte’ssmall slab, which is half a century earlier in date. TheKapelle slabs also share stylistic similarities with the pairin Oudelande, although the latter’s coffin settings appear tobe unique. Another, smaller cluster of shroud slabs can befound in St James’s church (Jacobskerk) in Flushing(Vlissingen), which lies less than 33 km from both Oudelandeand Kapelle, viz. a series of two or possibly three wornexamples commemorating married couples, all dating from thefirst half of the sixteenth century.32 Similar in design toeach other but varying in size, the first two show a pair ofshrouded effigies standing beneath a scallop-headed arch,their heads inclined towards one another and their handsplaced across their abdomen, but the third is too badly wornto be confidently identified as shrouded; all three are verydifferent in style to the slabs in Kapelle and Oudelande, andtherefore probably products of a different workshop.

If we ignore the shroud imagery and use just the overalllayout and the style of evangelist symbols and lettering asworkshop indicators, we find a huge number of slabs withshared characteristics across Zeeland and beyond. This ishardly surprising, for the slabs in Oudelande and Kapelle arealmost certainly Flemish workmanship. There are no quarries inthe Northern Netherlands so all freestone had to be imported,

especially from modern-day Germany and Belgium. In Flandersthe production of slabs developed into a veritable industry.Workshops flourished because they enjoyed the advantages ofgood local stone, waterways for transport, and proximity tothe city of Antwerp, which became the premier maritime tradecentre in the first half of the sixteenth century.33 Zeelandwas geographically well placed to benefit from the easytransport of Flemish slabs by water and it made economic senseto import slabs designed and carved to order rather than justblank slabs to be carved by local craftsmen. This helpsexplain the wealth of medieval incised slabs – includingeffigial slabs34 – in this province from a material point ofview, as well as the similarities based on the use ofpatterns: the MeMO database records over 550 survivingmedieval slabs in Zeeland, of which nearly 400 date from thesixteenth century. Moreover, as demand for tomb slabs grew inthe later fifteenth century, the Flemish workshops must havedeveloped ever more efficient methods of production, e.g. bypreparing stocks of slabs with standard border designs –notably, blank text bands along the margins, and evangelistsymbols in the corners – that could then be customised withinscriptions and personal designs, whether effigial, heraldic,or otherwise.35 Hence, the sculptor who carved the borders of aslab was not necessarily responsible for the central design,which explains why slabs may share some standard features yetdiffer stylistically in other respects. Researchers who wishto identify individual workshops need to bear this in mind asa potentially complicating factor; moreover, it is possiblethat different workshops copied each others’ designs.

If we focus just on shroud slabs, we find related examplesfurther afield within the Netherlands. First of all, a clusterof three shroud slabs survives in the basilica of StWillibrord (Sint-Willibrordusbasiliek) in Hulst (Zeeuws-Vlaanderen).36 The first, undated slab measures 143 x 88 cm andbelongs stylistically to the first half of the sixteenthcentury.37 Now rather worn, the incised effigy represents astanding female figure in a sleeved shroud that also coversher head: no facial features can be distinguished. Theinscription identifies the deceased as Lisbeth Loens PieterLoensdochter, widow of Adriaen van Lamsweerde; her date ofdeath was never added, which suggests that the slab wascommissioned in her lifetime, probably by Lisbeth herself. The

second slab measures 145 x 87 cm and features a single maleshrouded figure, but the inscription commemorates a nuclearfamily, viz. Jacop Francken Fransoiszoon (d. 1544), his wifeCornelie Huyghens and a son named Francoys Francke Jacobszoon(d. 1566).38 The incised figure has short curly hair and ayouthful physique, but with now indistinct facial features: hewears a narrow shroud draped diagonally across the rightshoulder and it is difficult to establish whether he is shownrecumbent or standing. Cornelie’s date of death is notmentioned and no blank space was left to add this later,whereas that of Francoys was given along the top above thefigure, with the year written in Arabic instead of Romannumerals. Therefore, it was probably Francoys who commissionedthe slab some time after his father’s death and who chose tocommemorate his – perhaps long-dead? – mother at the sametime. The third example in Hulst measures 175 x 102 cm andcommemorates Jacob de Wulf Pauwelszoon van Biervliet (d. 1541)with his wife Johanna vander Brugghe Pietersdochter (d. 1547)(Fig. 10). Carved in the taille d’épargne technique, but now tooworn to show any incised facial features, it features thehusband standing on the left. In his stance and the togalikedrapery of his shroud this figure resembles the incised effigyof Jacob Willem Jacobszoon in Kapelle (Fig. 9a), though thedesign and execution of the two slabs do not appear to be thework of the same hand. The shroud on Johanna’s effigy isdraped over her demurely inclined head and across her armslike sleeves, while covering most of her body down to herfeet. Carved between the heads of the figures is a shield witha house mark. The spacing of the couple’s inscriptionssuggests that their dates of death were added later and thatthe slab was thus commissioned in their lifetime.

An iconographic outlier to the north-east is the badlyworn shroud slab of Dirck Henricx Pelgrom (d. 1548) and hiswife Maria van den Hanenberch (d. 1578 or 1579) in thecathedral church of St John in ’s-Hertogenbosch (Bois-le-Duc)in the province of North-Brabant (Fig. 11).39 In an antiquariandrawing of c.1900 the slab still features quatrefoils with theevangelist symbols in the corners, while the shroud figuresthemselves were apparently variations of the by now familiartypes. Further north in the church of St Bavo in Haarlem(province of North-Holland) we find the shroud slab of Claesvan Huessen (d. 1505) and his wife Machtelt van Paenderen (d.

1535) (Fig. 12), which shares similarities with Jacop’s andJohanna’s joint shroud slab in Hulst.40 Claes’s toga-likeshroud leaves his right arm and shoulder bare, whileMachtelt’s effigy is more modestly covered. The figures appearto have been rather lightly incised and show a good grasp ofhuman anatomy as well as movement: Claes’s effigy exhibitsclear contrapposto. At odds with the figures’ apparently uprightposture, however, is a reed mat that serves as a backdrop, itsupper part rolled up to provide a head-rest: it is a featureoften seen on recumbent sculpted cadaver effigies.41 Anantiquarian drawing of 1880 shows another detail that can nolonger be verified because of the worn state of the slab: theeyes of the figures are firmly closed.42

Finally, there is the superb joint shroud brass of PieterClaeszoon Paelinck (d. 21 March 1546) and his wife JosinaWillemsdochter van Foreest (d. 28 February 1541) in the Groteor St Laurenskerk in Alkmaar (North-Holland) (Fig. 13).43 It isvirtually contemporary with Jacob’s and Johanna’s joint slabin Hulst (Fig. 10), with which it shares similarities, such asthe husband’s wide-legged stance and the diagonally drapedshroud that leaves bare the right side of the torso and rightarm. Josina’s modestly covered effigy wears a separate veil –or a separately knotted part of the shroud – over her inclinedhead. The brass is lavishly decorated with banderoles and twoangels supporting a shield, but there are no evangelistsymbols. As on the slab in Haarlem, the couple are shown erectagainst a reed mat. A detail that the brass shares with thejoint shroud slab of Jacob Willem Jacobszoon and his sonPieter in Kapelle (Fig. 9b) is the fact that the figures havetheir eyes open. We know from London evidence that brasses andincised slabs could be products of the same workshop,44 whichwould explain the similarities in design and iconography foundon the shroud slabs and the Alkmaar brass, as well as thedifferences.

Even though it is impossible to establish with confidencethat all the memorials discussed and illustrated here wereproduced by the same workshop, the striking iconographic andstylistic similarities suggest at the very least thatworkshops were influenced by each others’ designs. Furtherstudy reveals more shared design features between other late-medieval Dutch shroud monuments and known Flemish examples ofthe same period, but these are very different in style and

fall outside the remit of this paper.45 The MeMO databaseoffers great opportunities for comparative research ofmonuments on a much wider scale within the Netherlands, yet astudy of antiquarian documents is also needed to obtain abetter picture of the range, variety, and origins of themedieval monuments that were once to be found here.46

Ultimately, it requires collaborative research on aninternational scale to learn more about workshop methods,stylistic developments, commissions, prices, transport, andthe overall trade in tomb monuments across Europe. This maythen also enable researchers to identify individual workshops.

Discussion and analysis

In her monograph on transi tombs Kathleen Cohen compared theshroud effigies in St Saviour’s in Bruges to newly deceased,encoffined corpses, describing them as ‘swathed figuresholding small crosses on their breasts perhaps in imitation ofthe actual laying-out of the corpse’.47 Scholars have oftenregarded such imagery as in poor taste. Greenhill grudginglyadmitted that Wouter Copman’s brass in Bruges is ‘a work ofgood quality, though one cannot but wish we could have had himin his everyday dress instead’, adding that while beingmindful of one’s end was undoubtedly beneficial for the soul,‘the effect, from an artistic standpoint, was, to say theleast, unfortunate’.48

While cadaver and shroud imagery on monuments was awidespread phenomenon – with examples as far afield asTallinn, as discussed in a recent article in this journal49 –it was an acquired taste and never ‘popular’, compared to themore conventional choices of design.50 Moreover, there was nosuch thing as a standard iconography for representations ofthe corpse on monuments. Greenhill observed that whereas someof the cadaver brasses and incised slabs in his survey ‘arenot merely revolting, but positively obscene’, others,‘especially in Holland [sic], are decorous to a degree’.51 NigelSaul, who devoted a chapter in his 2009 book to ‘the cult ofthe macabre’, also remarked on the ‘immense variation’ evenwithin the genre of shroud memorials, though observing thatEnglish examples tend to be ‘less exotic than theirContinental counterparts’.52

It is these more ‘exotic’ varieties of cadaverrepresentation on monuments that tend to attract both popularattention and scholarly analysis, as Cohen’s monographillustrates. In fact, Cohen barely discussed the more‘decorous’ Flemish and Dutch examples at all, and it must beadmitted that her list of transi tombs for the Netherlands andBelgium – combined under the heading ‘Lowlands’ – isimprecise, inconsistent, and far from complete.53 Whereas Cohenincluded the Copman and de Munter brasses in Bruges, none ofthe slabs in Zeeland are even mentioned. Yet was this anoversight – for omissions are inevitable in a work of such awide scope – or did Cohen have reasons for excluding theseexamples? In her introduction she defined the transi as ‘agruesome depiction of the physical ravages of death’ with thecorpse depicted in a variety of ways, from a figure completelyswathed in a shroud to an emaciated, shrivelled or evendecaying corpse.54 The cursory treatment of the first varietyshows that Cohen’s main focus lay elsewhere: the category ofrecently deceased corpses in repose evidently held littleinterest for her. Her argument instead concerns medievalanxieties about death and salvation that she claimed wereexacerbated by the ravages of the Black Death, especiallyamong the earliest patrons – ‘proud and powerful, but alsoreligious’ – to commission such tombs: ‘The transi was oneattempt to alleviate some of the anxiety felt by these men asa result of the conflict beween their own pride and thetraditional religious demand for humility’.55 ‘Newly dead’ transieffigies are usually not given much thought, witness PaulBinski’s observation that ‘The transi tomb embodied aspecifically Gothic representational feeling for thethreatening and the grotesque’.56 In her recent study onEnglish medieval monuments, Tanja Müller-Jonak alsounhesitatingly defined the transi as a representation of thecorpse, even repeating Kurt Bauch’s mistake of citing thedouble Heslerton slab at Lowthorpe (East Riding) as an exampleof a ‘macabre’ tomb.57

If we categorise the Oudelande slabs with their coffinedeffigies or the shroud slabs in Kapelle as transi effigies andtherefore ‘macabre’, it should be noted that there is nothingthreatening or truly grotesque about them. The effigies do notreally confront the viewer with the brutal finality of deathor its ravaging effects on the human body. Nor do any of the

monuments discussed here carry moralising inscriptions thataddress the reader with warnings such as Sum quod eris (‘As I amnow, so shall you be’), or observations on the body now beingfood for worms, as we frequently find on cadaver tombselsewhere.58 Even the moralising verses on the slab of AechteClaeisdochter (Fig. 4) do not express those sentiments,offering instead a memento mori platitude about the wisdom ofrecognising death for what it is. We find no signs of humilityin the inscriptions or in the attitudes of the figuresdepicted, either, unless it be the modestly inclined andcovered heads of the female figures. In fact, the scantilycovered male bodies on the slabs in Kapelle look remarkablyvigorous, physically perfect, and age-resistant.

Moreover, the transi effigies in Kapelle are not shown inrepose as if newly laid out, nor rigid like corpses, norconvulsed in the way some cadaver effigies convey the finaldeath throes. Even the Oudelande figures exhibit no sense offinal rest, despite being shown in their coffins. Like thecouple on the Symondes brass (Fig. 2), they instead suggestanimation as their bodies turn towards each other with theirheads inclined. Mariken’s right foot with its extended toeseven appears to be moving forward slightly, as if she is aboutto step out of her coffin, thereby also suggesting an uprightrather than a recumbent pose. The sense of movement applies tothe coffin lids as well: are they shown resting on the coffinsbefore being nailed down, or are they instead falling awayfrom the coffins to reveal the corpses within? In fact, themajority of shroud effigies discussed here appear to bestanding with their feet firmly planted on the floor.Ambiguous is the posture of the couple on the Van Huessen slabin Haarlem with their heads resting on the rolled-up upperpart of the reed mat and their legs showing contrapposto (Fig.12), but the figures on the Alkmaar brass are clearly standingagainst a similar backdrop (Fig. 13). Exuding an air ofawareness and even mobility with their heads turned and theirfeet placed apart, none of the effigies look truly dead, eventhough some are shown with their eyes closed.

The coffined effigies in Oudelande as well as the shroudfigures in Kapelle seem to belong to a rather differentcategory of transi effigy, therefore, if that is indeed theright term to describe them. Despite their shrouds, they donot look dead at all, but very much alive. In fact, this is

probably the very message that these slabs were intended todeliver to the beholder, in contrast to those cadavermonuments in which the figures are unmistakably dead andshowing the transient nature of all flesh. Already in 1919 theDutch scholar Johan Huizinga, while discussing memorials thatillustrate ‘the disgustingly varied notion of the nakedcorpse, with cramped hands and feet, gaping mouth, with wormswrithing in the intestines’, marvelled that medieval peoplewould wish to dwell on such frightful imagery whereas ‘theydare not take the further step of seeing that decay itselfwill perish and turn into earth and flowers’.59 It would seemthat the Oudelande and Kapelle slabs do exactly that.

In her 1996 seminal article ‘Status and salvation’, SallyBadham devoted the latter part of her discussion to themeaning of cadaver tombs, arguing that whereas many cadavereffigies are indeed representations of the dead, others depictthe deceased at the time of resurrection.60 As an example of anEnglish brass that unquestionably depicts bodily resurrectionrather than death, she discussed the 1486 brass of Thomas andMargaret Spryng in Lavenham (Suffolk), which shows the coupleand their children kneeling in their shrouds in attitudes ofprayer and veneration.61 Badham also pointed out the ambiguityin the imagery of some brasses, such as the 1468 brass toRobert and Isabel Brampton in Brampton (Norfolk), which showsthe couple standing erect in their shrouds while looking upwith their eyes wide open and praying to the Virgin and Childabove, as their banderoles make clear.62 Even more explicit arethe texts on the shroud slab of Ralph Woodford (d. 1498) inAshby Folville (Leicestershire): two banderoles with the Latinwarning Disce mori (Learn to die), and another at the feet of theopen-eyed effigy with the verse ‘Of erthe I am formed andmaked. / To erthe I am turned all naked.’ are juxtaposed witha banderole at the top with the Latin resurrection text of Job19:25–26.63 In his 2004 article on images and texts relating tothe resurrection and the Last Judgement on English brasses andincised slabs Nicholas Rogers explored this aspect of cadavermonuments yet further, citing the Lavenham brass and the AshbyFolville slab as examples in an even wider range, although heobserved that later iconoclasm and losses now affect ourassessment of many such memorials.64

Crucially, as concerns the more macabre varieties, Badhampointed out that even those cadaver effigies that show the

deceased as unmistakably dead with their bodies in an advancedstate of decomposition – a notable if unusual English examplebeing the ‘verminous’ brass of Ralph Hamsterley (d. 1518) inOddington (Oxfordshire), which is virtually contemporary withthe shroud slabs in Oudelande and Kapelle – may yet have helda resurrection message for medieval viewers. The imagery wouldhave reminded the faithful of the reassuring verse Job 19:26,‘And though worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall Isee God’.65 This idea is underlined by the attitude of prayerin which the corpse is shown and the overall appearance ofalertness instead of repose, notwithstanding the presence ofworms instead of eyes in the sockets of the skull. Macabre andeven grotesque as the interpretation of this worm-riddledcorpse may seem, one need only compare this brass to late-medieval and Renaissance depictions of the Last Judgement inwhich the dead are sometimes shown pushing away their tombcovers as they emerge from their graves still dressed in theirshrouds or casting them aside, or crawling out of the earthwhile their bodies are yet in the process of regeneration.66

Gruesome cadaver monuments such as Hamsterley’s brass thusdo not merely visualise the finality of material death, butrepresent it as a mere stage in the progression from death toresurrection. The idea that even such grisly imagery may yetexemplify for the faithful the ultimate triumph over death (1Corinthians 15:54) also helps explain the shroud brass ofTomesina Tendryng (d. 1485) in St Peter’s church, Yoxford(Suffolk) (Fig. 14). The central figure of Tomesina herselfand five of the smaller subsidiary figures of her children areshown naked in their shrouds: not dead, as indicated by theiralert faces, open eyes and hand movements – folded inTomasina’s case, whereas the secondary figures are showngrasping their shrouds – but not yet in a perfect physicalstate, to judge by Tomesina’s thin arms and legs andpronounced kneecaps.67 Likewise, if Ralph Woodford is indeedshown in the process of casting aside his shroud, his gauntappearance indicates that he has not yet regained his prime.

Among Netherlandish tomb designs the link between death,resurrection and salvation is made evident in the elaborateiconographical programme of the near-contemporary doubledeckermonument in the Grote Kerk in Vianen (Utrecht).68 This memorialto Reynout III van Brederode (d. 1556) and his wife Philippotevan der Marck (d. 1537), which is attributed to the Cambrai

sculptor Colijn de Nole, forms an ensemble with the nearbyretable and (lost) altar. The lower tier of the monument showsa single sculpted cadaver in an advanced state ofdecomposition, while metaphorically rising above that on theupper tier are the recumbent effigies of the couple, wrappedin shrouds yet looking remarkably ‘fresh’ (Fig. 15).Immediately opposite is the badly damaged, sculpted stoneretable that still features the couple and their children,kneeling in veneration before the now missing image of theResurrected Christ.69 In this instance the decomposing corpseon the lower tier of the tomb does not represent either thehusband or his wife, but serves as a symbol of Deathvanquished, while the recumbent effigies above look forward tothe couple’s resurrection as visualised in the retable.

The Netherlandish shroud effigies that are the focus ofthis paper cannot really be termed cadavers, for despite beingshown as shrouded and even coffined they are not otherwisepresented as corpse-like and recumbent, i.e. truly dead. However,there are many ambiguous traits and permutations, such as thebare or shod feet described above. Another well-known trait ofmedieval effigies is the ambiguity in verticality v.horizontality,70 and the open or closed eyes are an additionalvariable. Priests on contemporary Netherlandish tombs areoften shown in a standing pose and with their eyes open, butwith chalices ‘floating’ above their hands as if placed on thechest of a recumbent corpse.71 The eyes of one priestly effigyin Kapelle appear to be shut,72 as on most of the shroudeffigies in this church, whereas those of Canon PieterJacobszoon and his father are clearly open (Fig. 9b). Othereffigies in the church are shown au vif in contemporary dresswith their eyes open. Nonetheless, it can sometimes bedifficult to establish whether the eyes are truly closed ormerely downcast: as the Flemish brass of priest Simon deWenslagh (d. 1395) in Wensley (North Yorkshire) shows, thisparticular ambiguity has a longer tradition.73 The cast of theeyes on the two recumbent effigies in Vianen is also ambiguousas they appear to feature both open and closed eyelids withridges above and below (Fig. 15).

Closed eyes might indicate an intermediate state betweendeath and resurrection. However, even with the slabs in theiroriginal horizontal position on the church floor, the vigorousand erect shroud figures such as those on the slabs of Jan

Symoenszoon and his son Symoen appear to have progressedbeyond the processes of dying, decomposition, and bodilyresurrection, as their physical appearance, stance andtentative movement show. Perhaps their temporary blindness orsleep, which their closed eyes suggest, indicates theirintermediate state of having been bodily resurrected at theLast Judgement, but not yet judged and awarded salvation. Onlyafter salvation will they be granted the Beatific Vision thatawaits all saved souls in Heaven, as described in 1Corinthians 13:12 and in the antiphon towards the end of theLauds of the Office of the Dead.

This reading of the imagery explains both the fresh andalert state of the effigies and the purpose of thesememorials, i.e. to attract prayers for the deceased who stillneed such intercession to attain salvation. The fact that atleast some of the slabs were commissioned during the lifetimeof the persons commemorated suggests that the effigies wereintended to serve as contemplative mirrors for themselves andfor other beholders, but less as a reflection on death anddecay in this world than on resurrection and salvation in thenext. The many varieties of cadaver effigies may thusrepresent a progression from recent expiry and pre-burialrepose through the various states of decomposition toresurrection. The first stage is represented by the ratherstatic shroud figures with their veiled eyes on the Flemishbrasses and slabs (Fig. 3). True cadaver imagery with anemphasis on the transitoriness of the body can be seen, forexample, in the Hamsterley brass. The next phase isillustrated by the still fully shrouded effigies in Oudelandewho are revealed in their coffins as the lids fall away.Finally there are the more animated and erect figures inKapelle who seem ready to open their eyes and throw off theirshrouds – the first of these actions having already been takenby the effigies of Jacob Willem Jacobszoon and PieterJacobszoon (Fig. 9a) and of Pieter Claeszoon Paelinck and hiswife Josina (Fig. 13). The diagonally draped toga-like varietyof shroud may even indicate that it is being cast aside.

There is thus nothing ‘grotesque’ about these shroudeffigies, nor are they meant to shock the viewer with macabreimagery that serves as a reminder of the inevitability ofdeath and decomposition. Instead the Zeeland slabs conveyfaith in the resurrection and hope of salvation – key concerns

for all Christians in the medieval period and beyond, for theresurrection is a recurring theme on post-medieval monuments.Perhaps the English sculptor Nicholas Stone (d. 1647), son-in-law of the Dutch sculptor Hendrick de Keyser (1567–1621) withwhom he worked in Amsterdam, was inspired by late-medievalDutch shroud monuments when he carved the effigy of SirWilliam Curle in Hatfield (Hertfordshire) in 1617.74 Comparedto the vainglorious finery in which the more traditional tombeffigies are presented, shroud slabs show honesty inpresenting the deceased simply in the shrouds in which theywere buried and in which they will approach God after theirresurrection. It may even be no accident, therefore, that someof these shrouds resemble penitential dress. The deceased are,after all, sinners in hope of salvation.

Postscript

Zeeland offers many more incised slabs with fascinatingiconography that deserve to be better known. Unfortunately,there is the very real risk of rapid deterioration and growingillegibility of these monuments. Harry Tummers alreadyhighlighted this problem in 199275 and the situation has onlybecome worse over the past twenty years, not just by the wearfrom footsteps but also from damp, a condition that badlyaffects many of Zeeland’s churches, some of which weresubmerged in the flood of February 1953 and still suffer theconsequences today. Yet even in their now often less thanpristine state, the incised slabs in Zeeland are valuableexponents of the Dutch memoria culture that the MeMO projecthas recorded for posterity in a database that offers awonderful tool for wider research across the borders.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The slabs at Oudelande and Kapelle were measured, studied andphotographed for the MeMO (Medieval Memoria Online) project in2012. Details and photographs of all known surviving Dutchmonuments and slabs up to 1580 are now accessible through theMeMO database, which was officially launched on 31 January2013. I am grateful to verger Jan Verheij for kindly allowing

me access to the church in Oudelande and to Gerard Lepoeterfor generous information and access to the church in Kapelle;to Chris Booms, Trudi Brink and Paul Cockerham for theirexcellent photographs; to Ronald Van Belle for his rubbing ofthe shroud brass in Bruges; to Truus van Bueren, Corinne vanDijk and Alexander de Bruin for their help in providing mewith a scan of the drawing of the slab in Haarlem; to SarinaHendrikse for her information regarding the Zeeland slabs andtheir inscriptions; to Margaret Scott and Mireille Madou fortheir comments on the dress of the shroud figures at Oudelandeand Kapelle; to Harry Tummers for lending me his copy of Hansvan Dijk’s MA dissertation; to Sally Badham for her permissionto use her rubbing of the Symondes brass, for her comments andfor reading an earlier draft of this article; and to JeanWilson, the anonymous second referee, and the editors fortheir valuable corrections, suggestions and patience. FinallyI wish to thank the Francis Coales Charitable Foundation for agenerous grant towards the publication of this article.

NOTES

1 F.A. Greenhill, Incised effigial slabs. A study of engraved stone memorials in LatinChristendom, c.1100 to c.1700, 2 vols (London, 1976), 1, p. 287; 2, p. 186and pl. 151b. Names are often abbreviated on monuments of this period,which can make it hard for non-experts to recognise them; theabbreviation ‘Cor’ is shorter than most, but Cornelis was a popularname.

2 ID 1509 and 1510 in the MeMO (Medieval Memoria Online) database athttp://memo.hum.uu.nl/database/index.html.

3 It was apparently once hidden under a wooden floor. See also P.C. Bloysvan Treslong Prins, Genealogische en heraldische gedenkwaardigheden in en uit dekerken der provincie Zeeland (Utrecht, 1919), p. 214, nr. 5.

4 Greenhill, Incised effigial slabs, 1, pp. 66–67. On 7 March 1798, i.e. in thefourth year of the ‘Batavian freedom’, a resolution was passed inZeeland that all heraldry should be removed from liveries and carriageswithin eight days and from churches within six weeks (though seats ofhonour were to be removed within a month). Evidently this order wasignored in places, for on 15 May 1798 a second, more detailedresolution was issued regarding the removal of heraldry – painted,sculpted, embroidered or otherwise applied – from pillars, cushions,bibles, monuments, floor slabs, house façades, carriages, ships, and soon. The results of this egalitarian iconoclasm are still visible todayon monuments throughout the Netherlands. I am grateful to Mr G.J.Lepoeter for sending me scans of the relevant documents for theprovince of Zeeland. See also G.J. Lepoeter, De geheimen van de kerk van

Kapelle onthuld. Van Onze-Lieve-Vrouwekerk tot huis voor het woord (Goes, 1996), pp.98–101.

5 Compare the discussion of so-called ‘heart stones’ – a term used inNorfolk wills to refer to small-sized slabs – and the size and price ofgravestones and brasses in J.R. Greenwood, ‘Wills and brasses: someconclusions from a Norfolk study’, in J. Bertram (ed.), Monumental brassesas art and history (Stroud, 1996), pp. 82–102, esp. pp. 85, 86–92.

6 The lid of the coffin shown in the burial scene in the 1504 polyptychof the seven Corporeal Acts of Mercy by the Master of Alkmaar(Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) is also decorated with a cross patée. I amgrateful to Paul Cockerham for this comparison.

7 Compare the proposed, but not commonly used, distinction between thecorpse (caro vilis), the emaciated cadaver (pulvis) and the verminouscadaver (vermis) in H. s’Jacob, Idealism and realism. A study of sepulchral symbolism(Leiden, 1954), p. 48.

8 K. Cohen, Metamorphosis of a death symbol. The transi tomb in the late middle ages and theRenaissance, California Studies in the History of Art, 15 (Berkeley,1973). While Cohen’s monograph may not be definitive or comprehensiveas a survey of cadaver tombs across Europe, it is still anauthoritative study and not to be ignored or dismissed. See also P.M.King, ‘Contexts of the cadaver tomb in fifteenth century England’, 2vols, unpublished DPhil thesis (University of York, 1987), and numerousarticles specifically on English cadaver tombs by the same author.

9 The epitaph and the names of the children are likewise upside down. Theusual interpretation is that this would have allowed the inscriptionsto be read by the figures, or perhaps by the deceased themselves whenthey emerged from their graves at the resurrection.

10 L. Stone, Sculpture in Britain: the middle ages, The Pelican History of Art(Harmondsworth, 1955, repr. 1972), p. 221 and pl. 178B.

11 For the later use of burial shifts, see J. Litten, The English way of death.The common funeral since 1450 (London, 1991), chapter 3: fig. 26 shows twominiatures of c.1475–89 by Simon Marmion, in which a corpse is sewn intoa shroud and then buried.

12 Cohen, Metamorphosis, pl. 53 (mistakenly captioned as pl. 52); R. VanBelle, Vlakke grafmonumenten en memorietaferelen met persoonsafbeeldingen in West-Vlaanderen. Een inventaris, funeraire symboliek en overzicht van het kostuum (Bruges,2006), pp. 148–49 (Bru. 20); K. Bauch, Das mittelalterliche Grabbild: figürlicheGrabmäler des 11. bis 15. Jahrhunderts in Europa (Berlin/New York, 1976), p. 252and fig. 374; also mentioned in Greenhill, Incised effigial slabs, 1, p. 286.

13 Only the first brass is illustrated in Cohen, Metamorphosis, pl. 52(mistakenly captioned as pl. 53), while both brasses are discussed andshown in Van Belle, Vlakke grafmonumenten, pp. 153–56 (Bru. 25–26).

14 Van Belle, Vlakke grafmonumenten, pp. 360–62 (Nwp. 5–6). See also thefragment of an unidentified, probably double slab of the fifteenthcentury in Meetkerke, p. 350 (Mee. 1); the double slab of AernoudtNocke (d. 1501) and Kathelijne Rijcquaerts (d. 1503) in Bekegem, p. 118(Bek. 1); and a worn and possibly re-used, double, white marble slab inthe church of Our Lady (Onze-Lieve-Vrouwekerk) in Bruges, pp. 226–27(Bru. 97).

15 A rare exception is the effigy of Raes […] Baeffsen(?) on thecontemporary double incised effigial slab in the church of St Bavo in

Aardenburg (Zeeland, close to the modern Belgian border), who islikewise presented in an ankle-length gown with lapels and even widersleeves, while his wife Aechte is dressed in a gown with a kirtle skirtunderneath and a long cloak on top. See MeMO ID 1527.

16 Illustrated in W.D. Belcher, Kentish brasses, vol. 2 (London, 1905), no.321; the brass is listed without an illustration in King, ‘Contexts’,vol. 1, p. 125, no. 48.

17 S. Oosterwijk, ‘Chrysoms, shrouds and infants on English tombmonuments: a question of terminology?’, Church Monuments, 15 (2000), pp.44–64’, at pp. 56–57 and fig. 12. King, ‘Contexts’, vol. 1, p. 88, no.14, and vol. 2, pl. 13, believes it to be a shroud.

18 Lepoeter, Geheimen, chapter 5.19 MeMO ID 1678.20 For example, see S. Oosterwijk, ‘“A swithe feire graue”. The appearance

of children on medieval tomb monuments’, in R. Eales and S. Tyas (eds),Family and dynasty in the middle ages, 1997 Harlaxton Symposium Proceedings,Harlaxton Medieval Studies, 9 (Donington, 2003), pp. 172–92; and idem,‘Babes on brackets. A meaningful distinction or an iconographic oddityon medieval tomb monuments?’, in R. de Weijert et al. (eds), Living memoria.Studies in medieval and early modern memorial culture in honour of Truus van Bueren(Hilversum, 2011), pp. 251–68.

21 The words of Death to the child and the child’s response in the FrenchDanse Macabre poem, as discussed in S. Oosterwijk, “‘Muoz ich tanzen undkan nit gân?” Death and the infant in the medieval Danse Macabre’, Word &Image, 22:2 (2006), pp. 146–64.

22 Aechte’s slab is among the earliest overall in this church. Out offorty-four extant slabs, one dates from the fourteenth, seven from thefifteenth, and one from the seventeenth century; the rest aresixteenth-century, including some that carry no date.

23 H. Tummers, ‘Medieval effigial monuments in the Netherlands’, ChurchMonuments, 7 (1992), pp. 19–33, at p. 30 and fig. 13. Tummers describedthe outlines of this figure as ‘rather straight and angular’ and theattention to correct anatomical detail as ‘poor’, but that seems ratherharsh. Hubrecht’s slab is ID 3302 in the MeMO database.

24 MeMO ID 3293 and 3299. Both carry later inscriptions that were added in1599 and 1602, respectively.

25 During work in the nave in that year many slabs were removed from theirpositions in the church floor and placed against the south wall of thenave, where twenty-two of them are still situated; others were movedagain in the late twentieth century.

26 The same observation about the physiognomy of these two effigies ismade in H. van Dijk, ‘Vloerzerken in Zeeland. Vloerzerken metpersoonsvoorstellingen, ca. 1300–1600’, unpublished MA dissertationsupervised by Dr Harry Tummers, 3 vols (Nijmegen University, 1989),vol. 1, p. 100.

27 MeMO ID 3297. The name ‘den ouden Boom’ probably comprises an agereference to distinguish an older member of the Boom family from theyounger generation. The same names and patronyms recur frequently inthese small communities, thereby creating genealogical pitfalls for theunwary. Wemelingen is a variant spelling of Wemeldinge, another villagenear Kapelle.

28 Compare the effigy of Cornelie Cornelis Jansszoonsdochter (d. 1526) onanother incised slab in the same church, which displays a trailingskirt beneath the woman’s long outer cloak According to the inscriptionon her slab, Cornelie was married to Cornelis Cornelisszoon de jongenBoom and thus perhaps the daughter-in-law of Cornelis Corneliszoon denouden Boom: see MeMO ID 3319.

29 Greenhill, Incised effigial slabs, 2, p. 186, had already listed the twoOudelande slabs under ‘shrouds, skeletons and corpses’. Van Dijk,‘Vloerzerken in Zeeland’, nos 96–97, likewise described both Oudelandefigures as shrouded, but he identified the Oudelande effigies ascorpses lying in their coffins, which is not quite the conclusion ofthis article.

30 MeMO ID 3321.31 Compare Pamela King’s suggestion of a Lancastrian preference for

cadaver effigies in her article ‘The English cadaver tomb in the latefifteenth century. Some indications of a Lancastrian connection’, inJ.H.M. Taylor (ed.), Dies illa. Death in the middle ages, Proceedings of the 1983Manchester Colloquium, Vinaver Studies in French, 1 (Liverpool, 1984),pp. 45–57.

32 See MeMO ID 2543 (measuring 170 x 100 cm), 2544 (190 x 112 cm), and2545 (193 x 100 cm).

33 See also the discussion in Van Dijk, ‘Vloerzerken in Zeeland’, vol. 1,esp. p. 18.

34 Greenhill already listed 123 incised effigial slabs for just thisprovince out of the 212 then recorded for the whole country, and thereare many more of which he was not aware. See Greenhill, Incised effigialslabs, 2, pp. 177–87 and pls 20b, 32a, 34a, 41a, 83b, 84b, 94a, 104a,122b, 144b, 151b, 155a. As Tummers observed, however, Greenhill’sdefinition of incised slabs may have been rather wide in order toinclude flat-relief and low-relief slabs: see Tummers, ‘Medievaleffigial monuments in the Netherlands’, p. 30.

35 Compare R. Emmerson, ‘John Lorymer’s stock: “marbylle stonys and latenwurke therto belonging”’, Monumental Brass Society Transactions, 13:4 (1983),pp. 304–05.

36 Geographically the region has changed dramatically over time. ZeelandicFlanders now lies on the mainland and is part of Dutch territory, butit was never part of the county of Zeeland originally.

37 MeMO ID 2902.38 MeMO ID 2892.39 MeMO ID 2668; see also J.A.F.M. van Oudheusden, H.A. Tummers et al., De

grafzerken van de Sint-Jan te ’s-Hertogenbosch, no. 164, athttp://www.grafzerkensintjan.nl/, where a brief comparison is made withthree unnamed slabs in Kapelle and the Paelinck brass in Alkmaar to bediscussed below. Very different is the shroud slab in high relief ofMargriete van Auweninge (d. 1484) in the same church (ID 2475). Thechurch of St John received cathedral status only in 1559.

40 MeMO ID 985; see also the online photo library of the Noord-HollandsArchief in Haarlem, http://www.beeldbank.noord-hollandsarchief.nl/,photo no. KNA006001583.

41 There are many English examples, but for an almost contemporary Dutchcomparison see the cadaver effigy on the Van Brederode double-decker

tomb in Vianen in S. Oosterwijk, ‘Food for worms – food for thought:the appearance and interpretation of the “verminous” cadaver in Britainand Europe’, Church Monuments, 20 (2005), pp. 40–80, 133–40, at figs 2b–c.

42 It should be noted that the artist also drew closed eyes on a brokenand unidentified single cadaver slab of a different style and period inthe same church: see photo no. KNA006001755. This figure is likewisepresented on a reed mat. On a recent visit to the church another jointshroud slab was found in the north aisle of the nave near the entrance,but this is so badly worn that one can now discern only the vaguecontours of two figures and the pattern of a reed mat behind them.

43 MeMO ID 361. The surname is variously spelled as Palinck, Paelinck,Palinc, Paling, or Palingh, which in the sixteenth century meant ‘pile-work’ or ‘boundary’. See also S. Oosterwijk, ‘A late-medieval shroudbrass in the new MeMO database’, Monumental Brass Society Bulletin, 122(February 2013), pp. 432–33.

44 S. Badham and M. Norris, Early incised slabs and brasses from the London marblers(London, 1999), esp. chapter 6, but also the comparisons in part 2, e.g.figs 7.13–14.

45 For example, the male(!) cadaver effigy with its fanned-out shroud onthe incised slab of Fransyne, wife of Adriaen de Baugele (or Bangele)(d. 1514 or 1543?), in the church of Sint Kruis (Zeeland) bears aremarkable resemblance to the single male effigy on the incised slab ofMarie Wreeckers (d. 1538), Cornelie Izebaert (d. 1540) and TanneVrombuts (d. 1528) in the hospital of St John (Sint-Janshospitaal) inDamme (Belgium). See MeMO ID 3685 and Van Belle, Vlakke grafmonumenten, p.246 (Dam. 23); compare also pp. 196–97 (Bru. 66).

46 Unfortunately the MeMO project team lacked both time and resources tocarry out antiquarian research into lost monuments.

47 Cohen, Metamorphosis, p. 108, commenting on pls 52–53. Compare also theswathed effigy in high relief in the Carmelite church of Dijon, whichcommemorates Jacques Germain (d. 1424), in Bauch, Das mittelalterlicheGrabbild, p. 252 and fig. 375.

48 Greenhill, Incised effigial slabs, 1, pp. 286–87.49 J. Bertram, ‘The cadavers of Tallinn’, Church Monuments, 27 (2012), pp.

75–81.50 Changes and additions continue to be made to the MeMO database, but in

October 2013 it listed 288 monuments with ‘portraits’, of which only 25are interpreted as dressed in shrouds.

51 Greenhill, Incised effigial slabs, 1, p. 287. This remark is actually moretrue of the province of Zeeland than of ‘Holland’, as shown here. It iscurious that Pamela King instead claimed that ‘Such slabs [i.e. of thedeceased in their shrouds] are relatively common in the fifteenthcentury in the Low Countries in particular, but there the body isusually – and often luridly – dead.’ See P. King, ‘Memorials of RalphWoodford (d. 1498), Ashby Folville, Leicestershire: the death of theauthor’, in J. Boffey and V. Davis (eds), Recording medieval lives,Proceedings of the 2005 Harlaxton Symposium, Harlaxton MedievalStudies, 17 (Donington, 2009), pp. 182–88, at p. 185. In fact, few suchslabs from the fifteenth century survive in the Low Countries and theyare anything but lurid. Presumably King was confused with German

examples, which tend to be very explicit, as discussed in Oosterwijk,‘Food for worms’, passim.

52 N. Saul, English church monuments in the middle ages. History and representation(Oxford, 2009), pp. 311–34, at p. 311.

53 Cohen, Metamorphosis, Appendix, p. 191, nos 62–81. For example, one mightquestion whether Brou ought to be listed under the heading ‘Lowlands’when Cambrai is included in the list for France.

54 Cohen, Metamorphosis, pp. 1–2.55 Cohen, Metamorphosis, p. 7.56 P. Binski, Medieval death. Ritual and representation (London, 1996), p. 142.57 T. Müller-Jonak, Englische Grabdenkmäler des Mittelalters 1250–1500 (Petersberg,

2010), pp. 162–67; see also Bauch, Das mittelalterliche Grabbild, p. 253 andfig. 376, and the dismissal of this misinterpretation in Oosterwijk,‘Food for worms’, pp. 40–41 and fig. 1.

58 S. Oosterwijk, ‘“For no man mai fro dethes stroke fle”. Death and dansemacabre iconography in memorial art’, Church Monuments, 23 (2008), pp. 62–87, 166–68, at p. 69 and n. 37; S. Badham, ‘Status and salvation; thedesign of medieval English brasses and incised slabs’, Monumental BrassSociety Transactions, 15:5 (1996), pp. 413–65, at pp. 454–56.

59 J. Huizinga, The autumn of the middle ages, trans. R.J. Payton and U.Mammitzsch (Chicago, 2004), chapter 5, p. 159; Huizinga’s influentialstudy is perhaps still best known under its earlier English title Thewaning of the middle ages.

60 Badham, ‘Status and salvation’, pp. 454–65.61 Badham, ‘Status and salvation’, p. 456 and fig. 25; see also N. Rogers,

‘“Et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum”: images and texts relating tothe resurrection of the dead and the Last Judgement on English brassesand incised slabs’, in N. Morgan (ed.), Prophecy, Apocalypse and the Day ofDoom, Proceedings of the 2000 Harlaxton Symposium, Harlaxton MedievalStudies, 12 (Donington, 2004), pp. 342–55, at p. 354 and pl. 72.

62 Badham, ‘Status and salvation’, p. 459 and fig. 27.63 Badham, ‘Status and salvation’, p. 459 and fig. 28; Saul, English church

monuments, p. 331 and fig. 76; Greenhill, Incised effigial slabs, 1, p. 287,2, p. 26 and pl. 151a, and idem, The incised slabs of Leicestershire and Rutland(Leicester, 1958), pp. 27–29. The slab is also discussed in King,‘Memorials of Ralph Woodford’, with excellent photographs by MegTwycross, pls 6–8, but without reference to the earlier articles byBadham and Rogers. Greenhill and King both note that the face with itswide-open eyes was incised in the nineteenth century.

64 Rogers, ‘“Et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum”’, passim.65 Badham, ‘Status and salvation’, pp. 459–60 and fig. 29; see also the

discussion of this brass and related imagery in Oosterwijk, ‘Food forworms’, pp. 56–57.

66 For example, see the risen dead naked or still in their shrouds in theJudgement Day scene in the Holkham Bible Picture Book of c.1327–35(British Library Additional MS 47682, fol. 41v); the various shroudedfigures in their coffins in the fifteenth-century Doom painting in StMary’s church in North Leigh (Oxfordshire); or the near-skeletalshrouded figures in the lower left corner of Michelangelo’s Last Judgementfresco of 1537–41 in the Sistine Chapel.

67 This brass was illustrated and published by John Sell Cotman in hisEngravings of sepulchral brasses in Norfolk and Suffolk (2nd edn, London, 1839), vol.2, p. 13, pl. XVII.

68 MeMO ID 2251 and 789. See Oosterwijk, ‘Food for worms’, pp. 41–42 andfigs 2a–c; T. Brink, ‘Monument of the Month’ for June 2012 athttp://www.churchmonumentssociety.org/Monument of the MonthArchive/2012-06.html, and idem, ‘Lang leve de dood, lang leve hetleven. Over de graftombe en het retabel in de kapel van de familie VanBrederode in de Grote Kerk te Vianen’, in P. Bitter, V. Bovenkampováand K. Goudriaan (eds), Graven spreken. Perspectieven op grafcultuur in demiddeleeuwse en vroegmoderne Nederlanden (Hilversum, 2013), pp. 133–48.

69 Compare the juxtaposition of the Woodford memorial and the slab in thewall above for a (lost) Easter Sepulchre, as described in King,‘Memorials of Ralph Woodford’, esp. pp. 183–84 and pl. 9.

70 For example, Saul, English church monuments, pp. 143–45, with reference toJ.E. Powell’s article ‘Vertical-horizontal?’, Costume, 13 (1979), pp. 1–7; also briefly Van Dijk, ‘Vloerzerken in Zeeland’, vol. 1, p. 79.

71 For example, see MeMO ID 3320 and 3322. I am grateful to Paul Cockerhamfor pointing out this anomaly to me on a recent visit to Kapelle.

72 MeMO ID 3300; compare also ID 2503 in Wemeldinge.73 M. Norris, Monumental brasses: the memorials (London, 1977), vol. 1, p. 37,

and vol. 2, fig. 42. This brass was engraved c.1375.74 I owe this suggestion about the Curle monument to Jean Wilson. See for

more examples her article ‘Go for Baroque: the Bruce mausoleum atMaulden (Bedfordshire)’, Church Monuments, 22 (2007), pp. 66–95.

75 Tummers, ‘Medieval effigial monuments in the Netherlands’, p. 30.

ILLUSTRATIONS

0. Map of the western part of the Netherlands with the namesof places mentioned in this article (after a map of theDutch Republic in 1629 published in Mariet Westermann, TheArt of the Dutch Republic 1585–1718 (London, 1996), fig. 1).

1a. Incised slab of Cristoffel Corneliszoon (d. 1521), 145 x86 cm, chancel floor, St Eligius, Oudelande (Netherlands).Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

1b. Incised slab of Mariken, wife of Cristoffel Corneliszoon(d. 1517), 145 x 72 cm, chancel loor, St Eligius,Oudelande (Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienst voor hetCultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

1c. Incised slab of Mariken and Cristoffel Corneliszoon in situin the chancel floor, front row, third and fourth slabfrom the north side, St Eligius, Oudelande (Netherlands).Photo: author

2. Shroud brass of John Symondes (d. 1505) and his wifeAgnes, St Margaret, Cley next the Sea (Norfolk). Rubbing:Sally Badham

3. Double shroud brass of Jacob Bave (d. 1432) and CatharinaPoltus (d. 1464), St James, Bruges (Belgium). Rubbing: RonaldVan Belle

4. Incised slab of Aechte Claeisdochter (d. 1469), 89 x 57cm, placed in the floor of the north choir, Church of OurLady, Kapelle (Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienst voor hetCultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

5. Incised slab of Hubrecht Cornelis Jacopszoon (d. 1517),177 x 101 cm, placed against the south aisle wall of thenave, Church of Our Lady, Kapelle (Netherlands). Photo: ChrisBooms, Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

6a. Incised slab of Jan Symoenszoon (d. 1524), 170 x 86 cm,placed against the south aisle wall of the nave, Church ofOur Lady, Kapelle (Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienstvoor het Cultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

6b. Incised slab of Symoen Jan Symoenszoon (d. 1525), 170 x 86cm, placed against the south aisle wall of the nave,Church of Our Lady, Kapelle (Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms,Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

6c-d. Faces of the effigies of Jan Symoenszoon and SymoenJan Symoenszoon, Church of Our Lady, Kapelle(Netherlands). Photos: Paul Cockerham

7a. Incised slab of Cornelis Corneliszoon den ouden Boom (d.1527) and his first(?) wife Mariken PieterGheertszoonsdochter van Wemelingen (d. 1504), 263 x 138cm, placed in the floor of the south chapel, Church of OurLady, Kapelle (Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienst voor hetCultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

7b. Face of the effigy of Cornelis Corneliszoon den ouden Boom(d. 1527) with eyes open, Church of Our Lady, Kapelle(Netherlands). Photo: Paul Cockerham

8. Incised slab of Stijne Lauwers (d. 1550), widow of ‘denouden Boom’, and Canon Pieter Cornelis, 173 x 100 cm,placed against the south aisle wall of the nave, Church ofOur Lady, Kapelle (Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienstvoor het Cultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

9a. Incised slab of Jacob Willem Jacobszoon (d. 1531) andCanon Pieter Jacobszoon, 242 x 128 cm, placed in the floorof the north aisle, Church of Our Lady, Kapelle

(Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed(RCE)

9b. Face of the effigy of Canon Pieter Jacobszoon with eyesopen, Church of Our Lady, Kapelle (Netherlands). Photo: PaulCockerham

10. Incised slab of Jacob de Wulf Pauwelszoon van Biervliet(d. 1541) and his wife Johanna vander BrugghePietersdochter (d. 1547), 175 x 102 cm, basilica of StWillibrord, Hulst (Netherlands). Photo: Collection Rijksdienst voorhet Cultureel Erfgoed (RCE)

11. Shroud slab Dirck Henricx Pelgrom (d. 1548) and his wifeMaria van den Hanenberch (d. 1578 or 1579), cathedralchurch of St John, ’s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands),antiquarian pen and ink drawing of c.1900 by L. vanValkenburg, now in the Brabant Collection of TilburgUniversity.

12. Shroud slab of Claes van Huessen (d. 1505) and his wifeMachtelt van Paenderen (d. 1535), church of St Bavo,Haarlem (Netherlands), drawing of 1880 by Pieter van Looy,Noord-Hollands Archief, Haarlem. Photo: Noord-Hollands Archief

13. Shroud brass of Pieter Claeszoon Paelinck (d. 1546) andhis wife Josina Willemsdochter van Foreest (d. 1541), 257x 147 cm, Great or St Laurence church, Alkmaar(Netherlands). Photo: Chris Booms, Rijksdienst voor Cultureel Erfgoed(RCE)

14. Shroud brass of Tomesina Tendryng (d. 1485) with heroffspring, both deceased and still alive, St Peter,Yoxford (Suffolk). Photo: C.B. Newham

15. Detail of the recumbent figures of Reynout III vanBrederode (d. 1556) and his wife Philippote van der Marck(d. 1537) on their double-decker monument, Grote Kerk,Vianen (Netherlands). Photo: Trudi Brink