and shapeless, and a poor achievement of the armourer's art. The author has a theory, yet to be substantiated, that it may be the work of that armourer, of whose productions only one signed example is known, namely, that shield in the Wallace Collection (ante, Vol. iv, page 234, Fig. 1306) inscribed: HIER · SPACINVS · MEDIO · BON · FACIEBAT "made at Bologna by Geronimo Spacini of Milan." Even this shield is an indifferent production; though it is rich in effect owing to the elaboration of engraved subjects that appear upon it. It is the very great similarity of the Tower suit to the shield in respect of the treatment of the subject ornamentation that has led the author to this conclusion. Both series of enrichment are produced, not by the usual means of aqua fortis etching, but by the medium of a graving tool, relieved by gilding and blueing. Both in the case of the shield and in that of the suit it is very apparent that the subjects are not drawn at first hand, but are copied from some engraving of earlier date. Any superiority in the decoration of the shield is probably due merely to the fact that it copies a finer original. Both decorative schemes appear to be founded upon the designs of Maerten van Heemskerk (dated 1555 and published at Amsterdam by Hieronymus Kock). In construction this little suit has no points of interest. Sir Samuel Meyrick noted that before 1828 the figure of Edward VI, in the line of kings in the Tower, was in armour, with scriptural subjects upon it. Since this suit is the only one now in the Tower so adorned, it must be the suit in question.
Of suits that tradition assigns to the ownership of King Charles I, both as King and as Prince of Wales, one of the two harnesses in the Tower of London has been handed down with corroboration of this attribution; while the other suit, like the third suit at Windsor Castle, has always borne the legendary ascription "said to have belonged to King Charles when Prince of Wales." The suit in the Tower ascribed to the ownership of Charles when Prince of Wales, is very complete in its parts. In fact, it is a double suit in that, as our illustration (Fig. 1442) shows, it is either adapted for cavalry use, or by removing the armour for the legs and arms, and by substituting short tassets for the long laminated cuisse tassets, and by changing the close helmet to one such as we see on the armour of an officer of pikemen, it is transformed into a complete pikeman suit, and so could be worn on foot (these extra pieces are shown in the illustration). This suit is a harness of about 1612-15. It cannot be identified in any of the Greenwich or Tower of London inventories, even by the wildest stretch of imagination, and the statement that it is possibly the work of Petit of Blois probably arose from its likeness in make to a suit in the Musée d'Artillerie of Paris, ascribed to that armourer. Only since
