Charles I; [Gauden, John]
Eikon Basilike. The Pourtraicture of His Sacred Majestie in His Solitudes and Sufferings With a perfect Copie of Prayers used by His MAJESTY in the time of His Sufferings. Printed in the yeer, 1649. 12mo, full crushed morocco, a.e.g.; pp. [8 (title, verso blank, blank, 'The Mind of the Frontispiece', blank, 'Explanation of the Embleme', The Contents (2)], 230 [i.e. 232, vide infra for misnumberings], [2 (blanks)], 8 (A perfect Copie of Prayers (7), An Epitaph (1, signed J.H.)); double-page frontis. (bound after title).
Pages misnumbered as follows: B1 misnumbered 21-22 (instead 23-24), 31 as 21, 73 as 72, 116 as 114, 120 as 20, 173 as 177 (7 weak), 180 is blank, 184 number on inner margin not outer.

This Royalist publication was so popular it made Charles I the only new Saint of the Church of England and so controversial that Parliament banned it immediately. It was first published within ten days after Charles' execution (and possibly before it) and ran through perhaps 35 editions in the opening year. So pernicious was it, that Parliament commissioned John Milton to answer it with Eikonoklastes, in which the poet questioned the attribution of authorship to Charles himself. Madan's epic bibliography assigns authorship to John Gauden, later Bishop of Exeter after the Restoration, but suggests he worked from manuscripts belonging to the late King. The Epitaph at the rear of the prayers is possibly by John Hackett [J.H.], chaplain to both Charles I and II, and Bishop of Lichfield after the Restoration. The famous image presenting Charles as Christian Martyr was engraved by William Marshall and was so popular, he had to re-engrave it eight times. It draws on both Titian's S. Catherine of Alexandra (in Charles' collection) and conventional iconography of Christ in Gethsemane. The central motif is that of Charles grasping the Crown of Thorns, whilst his Earthly Crown is left on the floor. The image states that true glory is in martyrdom and the ineffable, rather than human power. The whole of the emblem contains traditional symbols of such easily recognised significance that few contemporaries would have need the included guides to interpretation. Identification of editions is hindered by the illegal nature of the text (also the reason for its small, easily concealable size). This edition simply lists the publication year as 1649 (with no sign whether this is Old or New Style).