the election of his nominee, to whom on his departure for Rome, he gave one thousand marks as a present, and a second thousand as a loan, by the judicious use of which he might win the favour of the papal curia. He was elected 26 Aug. 1232. The royal assent was given without delay, and he started on his journey to Rome, accompanied by a number of the monks by whom he had been elected. Blund carried with him an assurance from the university of which he was a distinguished ornament — 'studens ac legens theologiam' — that his appointment would be popular. One of the body, Michael of Cornwall, addressed a copy of verses to the pope, in which he called on the whole of the university and men of every rank from the king to the commonalty to bear witness to the honesty of Blund's life, and the futility of any charges that might be brought against him (Mich. Cornub, Poemata; Hook, Lives of the Archbishops, iii. 167). All, however, was in vain. The well-deserved unpopularity of Des Roches in his adopted country rendered it impolitic for the pope to accept his nominee as archbishop. A colourable pretext for his rejection was suggested by his enemy, Simon Langton, archdeacon of Canterbury, brother of Archbishop Stephen Langton — that the archbishop elect by his own confession held two benefices with cure of souls, without a papal dispensation. This was in direct violation of the canons. Des Roches had written to the emperor, Frederick II., urging him to interpose in Blund's behalf. But the relations of pope and emperor were not such as to render such mediation hopeful. The choice of the electors was for a third time in succession quashed, and Blund returned home (1233) to end his days a simple presbyter (Matt. Paris, iii. 223; Rog. Wendover, Floret Histor. iv. 248, 267). A pleasing letter of Grosseteste's, after he had become bishop of Lincoln, excusing himself for not admitting to a benefice one of Blund's relatives, on the ground of his almost total illiteracy, bears witness to their long-standing friendship (Grosseteste, Epistolæ. Luard, p. 68, ep. 19). Blund died chancellor of York, the same year as his old opponent, Simon Langton, 1248.
[Matt. Paris (ed. Luard), iii. 168, 223, 243, v. 41; Rog. Wendover (Eng. Hist. Soc.), iv. 248. 267; Gerras. Cantuar. Gesta Regum, ii. 129; Annal. Monast. Osn. iv. 73; Dunstap. iii. 132; Grosseteste, Epist. (ed. Luard), p. 68.]
BLUNDELL, HENRY (1724–1810), art collector, was born at Ince-Blundell in Lancashire, where his family, who were Roman catholics, had been resident for many centuries. His father was Robert Blundell, and his mother was Catharine, daughter of Sir Rowland Stanley of Hooton, and the family thus became connected with the Welds of Lulworth, in whom the estate is now vested. In 1762 his father married as his second wife Margaret Anderton, and in 1761, resigning the estates to his son, retired on an annual allowance to Liverpool, where he died in 1773. In 1760 Blundell married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir George Mostyn, and settled at the ancestral mansion, Ince-Alundell Hall. His wife died in 1767 at the age of thirty-three, having borne him a son and daughters. The year of his marriage was that of the death of Sir Francis Anderton, and, after some compromise had been effected, his fortune was increased by the accession of the Lostock estates. The Roman catholic gentry were excluded by the penal laws from public life, and Blundell, probably influenced by the example of his friend and neighbour Towneley, turned his attention to classical art and archæology. His first purchase was the statuette of a seated philosopher, obtained from Jenkins in 1777. Visconti, to whom he was personally known, bears testimony to his fine taste. Michaelis says that 'a vigorous weeding-out could only have heightened the value of the collection, and the praise expended by Visconti on the collector is misleading. His chief agent was a Jesuit, Father John Thorpe, and his chief purveyor the well-known Thomas Jenkins.
Blundell's name appears on the title-pages of two books relating to his collection: 1. 'An Account of the Statues, Busts, Bass-relieves, Cinerary Urns, and other Ancient Marbles and Paintings at Ince.' Collected by H. B. Liverpool, printed by J. McCreery, 1803. This work is now very rare. It was printed for presentation only. Lowndes is mistaken when he describes it as containing a frontispiece and six plates. He may have seen a copy with engravings inserted, but the volume was not issued with them. 2. 'Engravings and Etchings of Sepulchral Monuments, Cinerary Urns, Gems, Bronzes, Prints, Greek Inscriptions, Fragments, &c., in the Collection of Henry Blundell, Esq., at Ince,' 1809, 2 vols, in folio, containing 158 plates and three frontispieces. Of this work only fifty copies were printed for presentation to Blundell's friends. The work was begun by the advice and assistance of his friend Towneley, whose help is not believed to have been very great.
Blundell purchased many works of art which came into the market through the revolutionary wars. He bought a relief — still at Ince — which he had himself formerly presented to the pope. Dr. S. H. Spiker has
