The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1915-09-11
ANCIENT ABBlTIAL SEAL
SEAL OF 18TH CENTURY ABBOT
FOUND IN NORTH SEA-AN IN
TERESTING NARRATIVE. 81

L u 0EA-$AIN .
TERESTING NARRATIVE.
In the days to come many pieces of
fotsam and jetsam, cast up from the
depths of the North Sea, will tell of
brave deeds wrought, and great suffer
ings borne, by our naval heroes in the
great war now raging, but few of them
will surpass, in interest for Yorkshire
men, the sample of long-hidden sea
treasure which has recently been
brought to light, says writer in the
| Yorkshire Post"
| Some years ago fishermen engaged
in their calling in the neighborhood of
the Dogger Bank had catch which
was something of a puzzle to them.
It was stone, or stone-like compost
ton of some, kind, oval in form, and
measuring -four inches by three and a
| quarter. On it was an incised seated
/ figure, with what seemed like lettering
on the border. When these seamen
i arrived in port they presented their
find" to the Vicar Of Confession, in
/ Suffolk He at once saw that it was
! the matrix of seal of some kind, but
not until recently did he make a wax
| impression from it. Then he found
that the lettering of the inscription
was perfectly good, and noticed one
word which seemed to connect the
seal with Selby. He communicated
with the Vicar of Selby Abbey, giving
a description of the matrix and the
wording of the inscription, and imme-
diately it was recognized as the seal
used by Abbot William de Aslakeby,
who ruled over the Abbey from 1880
/ to 1898. The seal itself is "a inches
long by inches broad, vesica shaped,
and bearing figure of the Abbot, un-
mitred. He is seated, and his right
hand is raised in benediction, while
with his left he holds the crozier,
which is turned inwards. The inscrip-
ton runs: [SIGlILLV. SCI. GER
MANI SELEBIENSIS ECLE: The
seal of the Church of ST. Germanus at
Selby.
4 How came this seal to be lying at
the bottom of the North Sea? No GER
tain answer can be given. But, as
everyone knows who is interested in
the religious life of England in the
sixteenth century, at the Dissolution
of the Monasteries shiploads of
monastic treasure were taken away to
different parts across the seas, and it
is just possible that during the pas
sage of some of the Selby muniments
this particular seal was thrown over
board. Such an explanation is not,
however, a very likely one, for those
who we're in charge of properties of
this kind would realise the value of an
Abbey seal. The solution of the prob
lem is doubtless a less prosaic one
than that, and possibly clue is given
by the details of the seal itself.
William de Aslakeby was mitred
Abbot, and on the seal he is repre-
sented as "pontifically vested
How is it that he is not wearing his
mitre and carrying his crozier episco-
pally, as he was perfectly entitled to
do? His predecessor had obtained for
the Abbey the grant of the mitre and
the crozier and all the rest of the
h episcopal paraphernalia. 1t was his
right to wear Bishops robes, he had
i jurisdiction not only over his monas-
terry, but also over a considerable area
!. outside the Abbey, he could confer
certain minor orders, sometimes he
was found acting as Bishop at epis-
copal CONSIDERATIONS, and he was, if not
Bishop or Bishop-Suffragan at all
events quasi-Bishop. Why, if this
i were so, was not Abbot William, on
his monastic seal, represented as
i wearing his mitre and carrying his
crozier episcopally? Was it because
. his predecessor had brought the Abbey
into bad repute? He was a man of
vile character, and, twice over, was
deprived of his Office. And yet it was
i this man who had obtained for the
4 House the coveted distinction of wear
!, ing the mitre, and bearing his cTozier
in episcopal fashion. Surely such an
honor, under the circumstances, must
Il have been regarded with mixed feel
ings by the immediate successors of
\ Abbot Thomas de Whalley of unhappy
memory. And it is not unlikely that it
was for that very reason that William
de Aslakeby refused to recognise the
n honor bestowed upon the House dur
ing the abbacy OF his unworthy
predecessor.
i But if Abbot William were angry
Il with his immediate forerunner, not
less displeased would the successors
j, of Aslakeby be with himself for hav-
ing foregone the signal distinction
which had been conferred on the Selby
! Benedictines. And when second
] William de Aslakeby came to rule
] over the Abbey in 1906 he was not long
d in claiming the privilege which had
been SO underyalued by his namesake
i The grant that had been made from
i Avignon in 1858 was confirmed just
| half century later, in 1908, by the