The headstones known as Belvoir Angel slates are a wonderfully distinct local group but they didn’t pop up in isolation; they emerged from existing cultural and folk art traditions. Exploring these peripheral contexts helps us to identify and understand the Belvoir Angels, themselves.

As a starting point; there are many headstones from this period carved in Swithland slate which are not Belvoir Angels and have no similarity to them – this is particularly true of headstones close to the quarries themselves and which, consequently, identifies the Belvoir Angels design as something localised to the Vale – based in/emerging primarily from the Vale of Belvoir. The location map shows that concentrations of Belvoir Angels emerge north of the quarries, roughly ballooning around the A46/Fosse Way corridor which would have supported the movement of such a heavy material:

Equally, there are headstones from the period which are similar in design but carved in materials other than Swithland slate – emerging from similar traditions but not defined as ‘Belvoir Angels’. It is possible that the north American examples fall into this category, too:

Context: fertile ground for research and exploration.

Exploring the context surrounding the Belvoir Angels group of headstones may help us to understand them better; particularly the emergence locally of such a distinctive design:

• Social context
• Religious and political context
• Susceptibility to disease and economic pressures
• Changes: post-Civil War, pre-Enclosure, growth in migration to the ‘New World’.
• Symbolism and iconography – messaging in the early C18th
• We know that considerably more Belvoir Angels would have been carved than have survived; have they survived in disproportionate numbers?

In essence, the Belvoir Angel headstones are probably best defined as an isolated, localised, quirky variation that has survived 300 years because of the enduring properties of the slate they are carved into. Perhaps this goes a little way to explaining their significance and our interest in them – they are both distinct and distinctive.

Linked examples – Angels but not Belvoir Angels:

The Heathcote catalogue serves as our basic reference and other headstones have been added to the list since the book’s publication; jokingly, it has been suggested that we should appoint the equivalent of the art specialists who ‘declare’ on Rembrandts and Van Goghs etc!

Debating what ‘is’ and what ‘isn’t’ is part of the fun?

• Would the original stonemasons have thought of their work as ‘different’ to the work of their peers?
• If so; were they protective of their designs? Or could anyone develop their own variations?
• Was the distinctive style so recognisable at the time that it represented the stonemasons’ ‘calling card’? As national fashions and London design books emerged, masons increasingly signed their work, so that they could be identified easily.

David Lea’s research in Leicestershire includes some interesting examples and some food for thought as well as debate:

The Orkney Angel.

(with thanks to Sheila Markham)

(May 2024) This photograph was taken at the Orkney Museum in Kirkwall – little is known about it and we have contacted the museum to see if we can find out more. The carving style is more like wood carving but it has the Belvoir Angels triangular face, almond eyes and grim expression but it also has less characteristic features such as, cherub-like cheeks and styled hair. Could it have been removed from the top of a headstone? So far, we don’t have a date but it is believed that it came from North America.