 |
|
Nicholas Stone’s effigy of the poet
and preacher John Donne in
St Paul’s Cathedral,
London, is a remarkable survival
of seventeenth-century English sculpture. Donne is shown
standing, perched on a funerary urn, and enveloped in a
body-hugging burial shroud which has been gathered into
two decorative ruffs at the head and feet. Only the
face, with its shuttered eyelids, raffish beard, and
benign, half-smiling expression, manages to breach this
unsettling cocoon. The clean, moist appearance of the
drapery and the softly-nuanced modelling of the features
testify to Stone’s position as the finest sculptor of
the English Baroque. The statue was installed within
eighteen months of its subject’s death on
31 March 1631.
Donne was the incumbent Dean of St
Paul’s, and his effigy is one of the very few monumental
figures to have survived, more or less intact, from the
Norman cathedral which perished in the Great Fire of
1666. It is hard to credit the old story that, as flames
consumed the old cathedral, the statue slid off its
pedestal and torpedoed its way into the safety of the
crypt. Yet it was here, half-forgotten and propped up
amidst the fragments of other pre-Fire monuments, that
the statue spent much of its subsequent history. Towards
the end of the nineteenth century, it was finally
resurrected in Wren’s church, south of the choir, in a
place roughly analogous to that which it once occupied.
The idea of the statue’s near
pristine resurrection from the ashes of firey
tribulation is wholly appropriate to the statue’s
iconography. In his
Lives of 1658,
Izaak Walton, gave a remarkable account of the statue’s
genesis: in his final days, the ailing Donne sought to
personally model for the statue, summoning an unnamed
‘choice painter’ to make a life-size sketch for just
this purpose. Donne had a wooden pedestal roughly
fashioned into the shape of an urn and proceeded to pose
upon it clad in his own winding sheet:
[…] he thus stood, with his eyes shut, and with so much of the
sheet turned aside as might show his lean, pale and
death-like face, which was purposely turned towards the
East, from whence he expected the second coming of his
and our Saviour Jesus. |
Walton therefore implies that the
intention was to show Donne newly regenerated and
emergent from the grave at the moment of the Last
Judgement. It thus anticipated a later vogue for
‘resurrection monuments’ in seventeenth-century England. Numerous upright shrouded
effigies incorporated into such monuments as those to
Henry Slingsbury at Knaresborough (1633) and John Dutton
at Sherbourne, Gloucestershire (1656-7), were directly
and demonstrably inspired by Donne’s monument in St
Paul’s.
A handful of scholars have
questioned the reliability of Walton’s story: is it
feasible that a middle-aged dying man could stand, feet
together, on a raised pedestal for long enough to model
for a preparatory drawing? Surely any artist worth his
salt would only require a likeness of the face; a
stand-in could be employed for the rest. However, it is
important to stress that the lost sketch, and the very
act of modelling for it, were not merely by-products of
the statue’s development. They should be related to the
period’s predilection for contemplative death rituals
designed to prepare the individual for death. Images
played a vital role in this context, and it is arguable
that the sketch of Donne in his shroud reflects the way
in which new, idiosyncratic
memento mori replaced the crucifixes and madonnas previously present
at the bedsides of the dying in Protestant England. |
|
 |
 |
|
Walton’s account has a ring of
authenticity in other ways too: Donne was generally
interested in art and art theory, and the idea that he
was eager to become intimately involved with the
creative process is plausible. There are a number of
surviving portraits that reveal his fondness for
effigising himself in various affected guises and
attitudes. He was also not a man intent on taking death
(literally) lying down, and was especially keen to make
something exhibitive and performative out of his death.
He wrote to a friend that ‘it hath been my desire
and God may be pleased to grant it, that I might die in the
Pulpit’. It was an ambition
he almost achieved when, on 25 February 1631, prior to
modelling for his monument and only a month away from
the grave, he preached his last sermon in front of the
court at Whitehall. He was in a
shocking state of emaciation. Walton says that his text,
which took death as its theme, was ‘prophetically
chosen’ and that ‘he presented himself not to preach
mortification by a living voice: but, mortality by a
decayed body and a dying face […] Donne had preach’t his
own Funeral Sermon’.
Donne’s writings also reveal a
persistent preoccupation with the mechanics of the
dissolution of the body and it its regeneration on the
day of Judgement. Yet at the same time, he severely
criticised art’s ability to properly reflect the horrors
of bodily putrefaction as a preface to its miraculous
rejuvenation. As a result, it may also be reasonable to
assume that he intended his statue to critique the
shrouded, desiccated corpses of the traditional
transi tomb
(especially as the latter retained contentious
associations with an outmoded Catholic belief in
purgatory).With this in mind, the shroud and the
funerary urn of Donne’s statue operate beyond their
roles as generic symbols of death. They supply a nuanced
context to the upright figure, emphasising the
miraculous narrative of its resurrection. |
|
Further reading:
- Bald, R. C., John
Donne – A Life
(London, 1970).
- Bevan, J., ‘Hebdomeda
Mortium: The Structure of Donne’s Last
Semon’, The Review of English Studies,
New Series, 45:178 (May 1994), pp. 185-203.
- Foxell, N.,
A Sermon in Stone: John Donne and His Monument in St Paul’s Cathedral
(London,
1978).
- Gardner, H.,‘Dean
Donne’s Monument in St. Pauls’, in R. Wellek &
A. Ribeiro (eds), Evidence in Literary
Scholarship (Oxford, 1979), pp. 29-44.
- Peterson, R.S., ‘New Evidence on Donne’s Monument: I’, John
Donne Journal,
20 (2001), pp. 1-51.
- Walton, I.,
The Lives of Dr. John Donne, Sir Henry Wotton, Richard Hooker, George
Herbert, and Dr. Robert Sanderson, ed. T.
Zouch (New York, 1854).
|
|
Dr Philip Cottrell,
University
College Dublin |
|
|