not only for the purpose of distinguishing the different leaders, but as a veil to protect the armour, so apt to heat excessively when exposed to the direct rays of the sun.  It was of a violet colour, without any distinctive mark or badge.  His highly-decorated shield was borne behind him, the three garbs and the lions being chiefly conspicuous in the marshalling:  the former, the original bearing of Hugh Lupus, was often used by the constables of Chester, in compliment to their chief lord.  Its shape was angular, and suspended from the neck by a strap called guige or gige, a Norman custom of great antiquity.  A huge broadsword was carried by his armour-bearer, the person of the chief being without any further means of impediment or defence than a French stabbing sword, fastened on one side of his pommel, and a stout battle-axe on the other.  The horse was decorated with great and costly profusion.  At a short distance rode William de Bellomonte, the baron’s inseparable companion.  A small train of archers and cross-bowmen brought up the rear of the escort, save the baggage and sumpter horses, laden not only with provisions but cooking utensils, and even with furniture for the household.  In those days it was a matter both of economy and necessity for the occupants or lords of several castles to travel with accompaniments of this sort; though possessing many residences, most of them had the means and even conveniences only for the furnishing of one.

The seneschal and his train alighted, doing homage to their lord, who was conducted with great pomp and ceremony into the fortress, now lapsed for ever from the blood and succession of the Lacies; yet Roger de Fitz-Eustace and his descendants, probably in commemoration of the source whence originated their great honours and endowments, were ever afterwards styled by the surname of De Lacy; and, strange as it may appear, his father, John, constable of Chester, who died fifteen years previously to this event, and who founded the Cistercian abbey of Stanlaw, the parent establishment of Whalley, though he had not the slightest pretensions to the name of Lacy, was popularly invested with the name.  It is still more singular that the mistake should have been committed by Henry de Lacy, the last of the line of the Fitz-Eustace, third in descent from Roger, in the foundation-charter of Whalley Abbey, where he expressly styles his ancestor “Joh. de Lacy, Const.  Cest.”

Accompanied by her father and her female attendants, the “gentle” maiden entered the hall.  She was stately and beautifully formed, with little show of her lineage except the high forehead and well-formed nose of the Fitz-Eustace.  She was enveloped from head to foot in a long gown or habit; over this was cast a richly-embroidered purple silk surcoat or cloak, embellished with those ephemeral absurdities called pocketing-sleeves.  These hung from the wrists almost to the ground, showing an opening or pocket which might have supplied the place of a lady’s arm-bag in our own era.  A wimple or peplus was thrown over the head; a sort of hood, which, instead of covering the shoulders, was brought round the neck beneath the chin like a warrior’s gorget, giving an exceedingly stiff and muffled appearance to the upper part of the figure.