The Grey Friars in Oxford
by A. G. Little · English · Gutenberg #42587 · 1,048,316 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Grey Friars in Oxford
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The Grey Friars in Oxford
Author: A. G. Little
Release date: April 24, 2013 [eBook #42587]
Most recently updated: October 23, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42587
Credits: Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD ***
GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD
Oxford
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
THE GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD
PART I A HISTORY OF THE CONVENT
PART II BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF THE FRIARS
TOGETHER WITH _APPENDICES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS_
BY ANDREW G. LITTLE, M.A.
BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD
Oxford
PRINTED FOR THE OXFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1892
[_All rights reserved_]
PREFACE.
The object of this work is to give an account of the outward life of the
Franciscans. This might be fairly taken to include the whole activity of
the friars with the exception of their contribution to scholastic
philosophy; for that clearly forms a subject by itself. But even with this
limitation the account here given of the Franciscans’ work does not
pretend to be complete. The documents which remain to us do not by any
means cover the whole of the active life of the Franciscans. While for the
thirteenth century and the Dissolution the records are fairly numerous,
the materials for the intervening period are very scanty. Thus any attempt
at a chronological narrative was out of the question. And the almost total
absence of all Franciscan records (properly so called) in England, has
proved an effectual bar to any completeness of treatment at all. The
arrangement here adopted, both in the choice of subjects and in the
relative prominence given to each of them, is due simply to the exigencies
of the available materials relating to the Oxford Convent. The
topographical information derived from records and other sources has been
neither full enough nor accurate enough to enable me to supply a map or
plan of the property and buildings of the Grey Friars.
A few words will be necessary to explain the plan pursued in Part II. An
endeavour has been made to collect the names of all the Grey Friars who
lived in the Convent at Oxford or who studied in the University: the list,
if complete, would have included all the names which were, or ought to
have been, entered in the ‘Buttery-books’ or ‘Admission-books’ of the
house. To show how far short of this aim the result falls, it is only
necessary to point out that the names of friars actually included in Part
II number little more than three hundred: and the connexion of some of
these with Oxford is doubtful. The bibliographies, appended to the
biographical notices, are intended to include all the extant works of each
friar, but not all the MSS. nor all the editions of each work.
Occasionally works are added which have not been identified, but of whose
previous existence there is sufficient evidence. For this part of the book
I have used, besides the well-known mediaeval bibliographies, a number of
catalogues of manuscripts; a list of these is given below, with the object
of showing not so much what has been done, as what has been left undone.
Among unpublished sources, the most valuable have been various collections
in the Public Record Office, especially the Patent, Close, and Liberate
Rolls; the Registers of Congregation (Reg. A a, G 6, H 7, I 8), the
records of the Chancellor’s Court (Acta Curiae Cancellarii ~D~, ~F~, EEE,
or ~B~), and Brian Twyne’s collections, in the Oxford University Archives.
Further, I have had occasion to consult the Oxford City Archives, some of
the old registers of wills at Somerset House, and various manuscripts in
the British Museum, Lambeth Palace, and Gray’s Inn; the Bodleian and
several College libraries at Oxford; the University (or Public) Library
and several College libraries at Cambridge; the library of Sir Thomas
Phillipps at Thirlestaine House, Cheltenham; the National Library at
Paris, and the Municipal Library at Assisi. I have had no opportunity of
examining the episcopal registers of the diocese of Lincoln, extracts from
which, however, are contained in Twyne’s transcripts.
The Index, so far as it deals with the names of persons and places, will,
I hope, be found complete, with the following limitations. The
authorities quoted, either in the text or in the notes, the places where
the manuscripts cited were written, or were formerly or are now kept, or
where the editions referred to were printed, are not mentioned in the
Index, unless there is some particular reason for including them. So far
as it deals with subjects, the Index is meant to be supplementary to the
Table of Contents. The writings of the friars are not classified in the
Index, except those which come under the headings _Aristotle_, _Bible_,
_Evangelical Poverty_ and _Sentences_.
Finally, I wish to express my thanks to those who have given me aid,
namely, to the Rev. W. G. D. Fletcher, Vicar of St. Michael’s, Shrewsbury,
author of ‘The Black Friars in Oxford,’ who generously placed a valuable
collection of references at my disposal; to Mr. Falconer Madan for
assistance and advice; to the Keeper of the University Archives and the
Town Clerk of Oxford for allowing me free and repeated access to the
documents under their respective charges; and to the authorities in the
various offices and libraries in which I have worked, for their unfailing
courtesy.
ANDREW G. LITTLE.
_30 November, 1891._
CATALOGUES OF MANUSCRIPTS CONSULTED.
For the compilation of the bibliographies in Part II the following
catalogues of manuscripts have been consulted[1]:--
Bernard de Montfaucon, Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum Manuscriptorum; Paris,
1739, 2 vols. fol.
Haenel, Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum qui in Bibliothecis Galliae,
Helvetiae, Belgii, Britanniae M., Hispaniae, Lusitaniae, asservantur;
Lipsiae, 1830.
Edward Bernard, Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum Angliae et Hiberniae in
unum collecti; Oxon., 1697, 2 vols., fol. Vol. I, Bodleian; Oxford
Colleges; Cambridge Colleges and Public (University) Library. Vol. II,
Cathedral and other libraries in England; Irish libraries.
Catalogues of the following collections in the British Museum:--Royal MSS.
1734, 4to (Casley); Sloane and Birch, 1782, 2 vols. 4to (Ayscough);
Cotton, 1802, fol.; Harley, 1808-1812, 4 vols., fol.; Lansdowne, 2 parts,
1819, fol.; Arundel and Burney, 1834-40, fol.; Additional MSS. from A. D.
1783-1887.
A Catalogue of the Archiepiscopal MSS. in the Library at Lambeth Palace,
by H. J. Todd; 1812, fol.
Ancient MSS. in Gray’s Inn Library, 1869.
Catalogues of the following collections in the Bodleian:--Laudian MSS.,
1858-1885; Canonician MSS., 1854; Tanner MSS., 1860; Rawlinson, 1862-1878;
Digby, 1883; Catalogue of the Ashmolean MSS., 1845-1866.
Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum qui in Collegiis Aulisque Oxoniensibus
hodie adservantur (Coxe); Oxon., 1852, 2 vols., 4to.
A Catalogue of the Manuscripts preserved in the Library of the University
of Cambridge, edited for the Syndics of the University Press; Cambridge,
1856, &c., 6 vols., 8vo.
Nasmith, Catalogue of the Parker MSS. in Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge; 1787, 4to.
Catalogue of MSS. in the library of Gonville and Caius, by J. J. Smith;
1849, 4to.
Catalogus Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae Parisiensis; Paris,
1739-1744, 4 vols., fol.
Inventaire des Manuscrits conservés à la Bibliothèque Impériale sous les
Nos. 8823-18613, du Fonds Latin et faisant suite à la série dont le
Catalogue a été publié en 1744 par Léopold Delisle; Paris, 1863, &c., 8vo.
Inventaire des MSS. de la Bibliothèque Nationale, Fonds de Cluni, par L.
Delisle.
Catalogue général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques des
Départements; Paris, 1849-1885, 7 vols., 4to.
Catalogue général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques de France;
(α) Paris: (1) Bibliothèque Mazarine, by A. Molinier, 3 vols. 8vo.; (2)
Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, by H. Martin, 1885, &c. (vols. 1 and 2 contain
the Latin MSS.). (β) Départements, vols. 1-12, 1886-1889.
Catalogue des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Publique de Bruges (P. J.
Laude), Bruges, 1859, 8vo.
Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae Monacensis, Cod. Lat.
vols. 1 and 2[2]; Monachii 1868-1874.
Katalog der Handschriften der königl. öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden;
Leipzig, 1882-3, 2 vols., 8vo.
Tabulae Codicum Manuscriptorum praeter Graecos et Orientales in
Bibliotheca Palatina Vindobonensi asservatorum; Vienna, 1864-1875, 7
vols., 8vo. (Codices 1-14,000).
Catalogus Codicum Latinorum Bibliothecae Mediceae Laurentianae (Bandini),
1774, 5 vols., folio.
Bibliotheca Leopoldina Laurentiana (Bandini); Florence, 1791, 3 vols.,
folio.
Bibliotheca Manuscripta ad S. Marci Venetiarum (Valentinelli); Venet.
1868-1873, 6 vols., 8vo.
Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Codices Palatini Latini, tom. I, codices
1-921; 1886.
Bibliothecae Patavinae Manuscriptae publicae et privatae opera Jacobi
Philippi Tomasini; Utini, 1639, 4to. (Tomasin).
Bibliothecae Venetae Manuscriptae publicae et privatae opera Jacobi
Philippi Tomasini; Utini, 1650, 4to. (Tomasin).
ABBREVIATIONS AND EDITIONS USED.
Anal. Franc. = Analacta Franciscana, sive chronica aliaque varia documenta
ad historiam Fratrum Minorum spectantia, edita a Patribus Collegii S.
Bonaventurae, Quaracchi, 1885-7, 2 vols.
Archiv f. L. u. K. Gesch. = Archiv für Literatur- und Kirchengeschichte
des Mittelalters, herausgegeben von H. Denifle und F. Ehrle.
Bale, Script. = Illustrium Majoris Britanniae Scriptorum ... Summarium,
1559, 2 vols.
B. of Pisa = Bartholomew of Pisa, Liber Conformitatum, ed. Milan, 1510.
Bernard = Catalogi Librorum MSS. Angliae et Hiberniae, Oxon., 1697.
Burnet, Reformation = History of the Reformation of the Church of England,
Oxford, 1829.
Foxe = The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe, edited by Cattley, 1841.
Hist. Litt. = Histoire Littéraire de la France (by the Benedictines of St.
Maur, and the Members of the Institute), 1733-1873.
Lyte = Maxwell Lyte, History of the University of Oxford, 1886.
Montfaucon = B. Montfaucon, Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum MSS., &c.
P.C.C. = Prerogative Court of Canterbury, Wills proved in the, now at
Somerset House.
Q. R. Misc. = Queen’s Remembrancer, Miscellaneous Accounts, now in the
Public Record Office.
Q. R. Wardrobe = Queen’s Remembrancer, Wardrobe Accounts, now in the
Public Record Office.
R.O. = Public Record Office.
R.S. = Rolls Series, or Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and
Ireland during the Middle Ages, published under the direction of the
Master of the Rolls.
Tomasin = Bibliotheca Patavinae MSS., and Bibliothecae Venetae MSS. &c.
(see above).
Wadding = L. Wadding, Annales Minorum, Romae, 1731, &c.
Wadding, Script. = L. Wadding, Scriptores Ordinis Minorum, Romae, 1806.
Wadding, Sup. ad Script. = Supplementum et castigatio ad Scriptores trium
Ordinum S. Francisci a Waddingo aliisve descriptos ... opus posthumum Fr.
Jo. Hyacinthi Sbaraleae, Romae, 1806.
Wood-Clark = Survey of the Antiquities of the City of Oxford, by Anthony
Wood, edited by Andrew Clark, 1889-1890. [The MS. from which this edition
is printed is often referred to in the following pages, namely ‘Wood MS.
F. 29 a’ in the Bodleian.]
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
PART I. HISTORY OF THE CONVENT.
CHAPTER I. EARLY YEARS.
Arrival and first settlement of the Franciscan Friars at
Oxford 1
Their early poverty and cheerfulness 3
Oxford Friars as peacemakers and Crusaders 7
Relations to the University and to the earliest Colleges 8
Their strict observance of the Rule 10
CHAPTER II. PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS.
First settlement of the Friars was within the City Wall 12
They acquire the houses of William, son of Richard de
Wileford (1229), and Robert, son of Robert Oen 13
Increase of the _area_ in 1244-1245 14
Grants from the King, Thomas de Valeynes, and others 15
The island in the Thames, 1245 16
Messuage of Laurence Wych, Mayor of Oxford, 1246 17
Friars of the Sack settle in Oxford 17
Their property granted to the Minorites by Boniface VIII,
Clement V, and Edward II, 1310 18
Grants from various persons, 1310 19
Inquisitiones ad quod Damnum, concerning properties belonging
to Richard Cary and John Culvard, 1319 19
Grants by Walter Morton (1321) and John de Grey de Rotherfield
(1337) 20
To what classes did the donors belong? 20
Buildings of the Grey Friars, absence of information about 21
Original houses and chapel 21
School built by Agnellus 21
The stricter Friars oppose the tendency to build 22
Building of the new Church of St. Francis 22
Its site and appearance 23
William of Worcester’s description of it 24
Monuments and tombs in the Church 24
Grave of Roger Bacon 26
Cloisters, Chapter-house, Refectory, and other buildings 27
Conduit and Gates 28
CHAPTER III. FRANCISCAN SCHOOLS AT OXFORD.
Learning necessary to the Friars 29
The first readers or lectors to the Franciscans at Oxford 30
Nature of the office of lector, as understood by Grostete and
Adam Marsh 31
The lector and his _socius_ 33
Later lectors were ordinary Regent Masters in Theology 34
Appointment to the office of lector 34
Special regulations concerning the lectors 36
System of instruction in theology recommended by Grostete 36
Lectures by the Friars 37
Controversy with the University about theological degrees in 1253 38
Controversy between the University and the Dominicans 39
Study of Arts (philosophy) before Theology, insisted on by the
University 41
Roger Bacon on the need for some preliminary training for the
Friars 42
Extortion of graces by external influence; ‘wax-doctors’ 42
Career of a student Minorite 43
On the numbers of Friars sent to Oxford 43
Course of study before ‘opposition’ 44
‘Opposition’ and ‘Responsion’ 45
The degree of Bachelor of Divinity 46
Exercises before ‘Inception’ 47
‘Vesperies’ and Inception 48
Questions disputed on these occasions in the thirteenth century 49
How far were the statutable requirements as to the period of
study really carried out? 49
Expenses at Inception 50
Necessary Regency 52
Conditions on which dispensations were granted 52
Maintenance of Franciscan students at the University 53
What proportion took degrees 54
Relative numbers of the various Religious Orders at Oxford 54
CHAPTER IV. BOOKS AND LIBRARIES.
Absence of privacy in a Franciscan Friary 55
Books of individual Friars 56
The two libraries, and their contents 57
Grostete’s bequest of books 57
Extant MSS. formerly in the Franciscan Convent 59
Alleged illegal detention of books by the Friars in 1330 60
Richard Fitzralph’s statements 60
Richard of Bury, on the libraries of Mendicant Friars 61
Dispersion of the books of the Oxford Franciscans 61
Leland’s description of the library in his time 62
CHAPTER V. PLACE OF OXFORD IN THE FRANCISCAN ORGANIZATION.
Learned Friars as practical workers among the people 63
Their Sermons 64
Educational organization throughout the country 64
Relations of the Franciscan School at Oxford to the other
Franciscan Schools of Europe 66
English Franciscans teach in foreign Universities 67
Oxford as the head convent of a _custodia_ 68
Provincial Chapters held at Oxford 69
CHAPTER VI. RIVALRY BETWEEN THE ORDERS: ATTACKS ON THE FRIARS.
Rivalry between the Friars Preachers and Minors: proselytism 71
Politics and Philosophy 72
Peckham and the Oxford Friars 73
Evangelical Poverty 75
Contrast between theory and practice 78
Attack on the Friars by Richard Fitzralph 79
Charge of stealing children 79
Wiclif’s early relations to the Friars 81
His attack on them in his later years 82
Charges of gross immorality made not by Wiclif, but by his
followers 83
The University and the Friars; summary of events in 1382 84
Unpopularity of the Friars in the fifteenth century 85
Foreign Minorites expelled from Oxford 86
Conspiracies against Henry IV; part taken by the Oxford
Franciscans 87
Relations between the Conventual and Observant Franciscans 87
CHAPTER VII. ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE FRIARS’ MANNER OF LIFE AND MEANS
OF LIVELIHOOD: BENEFACTORS.
On the loss of Franciscan Records 89
Mendicancy as a means of livelihood 91
Procurators and limitors 92
Career of Friar Brian Sandon, legal _syndicus_ of the Oxford
Friary in the sixteenth century 93
Charges of immorality against the Friars 94
Their worldly manner of life before the Dissolution 96
Poverty of the Convent 97
Sources of income 97
Annual grants from the King and others 97
Frequency of bequests to the Friars 100
List of benefactors 102
Some other sources of income 110
Classes from which the Friars were drawn 111
Motives which led men to enter the Order 111
CHAPTER VIII. THE DISSOLUTION.
Attitude of the Grey Friars towards the Reformation in its
intellectual, religious, and political aspects 112
The Royal Divorce 114
Visitation of Oxford University in 1535 116
Suppression of the Friaries in 1538 116
Condition of the Grey Friary 117
Expulsion of the Friars; their subsequent history; Simon Ludford 119
Houses and site of the Grey Friars 120
Dr. London tries to secure the land for the town 121
Lease and sale of the property 121
Notes on its subsequent history 123
Total destruction of the buildings 124
PART II. BIOGRAPHICAL AND BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF INDIVIDUAL FRIARS.
CHAPTER I.
Custodians and Wardens 125-133
CHAPTER II.
Lectors or Regent Masters of the Franciscans 134-175
CHAPTER III.
Franciscans who studied in the Convent at Oxford, or had
some other connexion with the Town or the University 176-294
APPENDICES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS.
=A. Documents relating to the acquisition of land property by the
Grey Friars.=
1. Grant of a house by William, son of Richard de Wileford 295
2. Grant of a house by Robert, son of Robert Oen, 1236 296
3. Royal license to enclose their possessions and throw down
part of the old City Wall, 1244 296
4. Island in the Thames acquired by Henry III, 1245 297
5. Grant of the same island to the Friars, 1245 297
6. Grant of two messuages by Thomas de Valeynes, 1245 298
7. Grant of a messuage by Laurence Wych, Mayor of Oxford, 1246 299
8. License to enclose their new possessions; the City Wall to
be repaired, 1248 299
9. Royal grants to the Friars of the Sack, 1262, 1265 300
10. Grants to the Friars Minors from various persons, 1310 301
11. Property of the Friars of the Sack conferred on the Friars
Minors, 1310 301
12. Re-grant of the same property to them, 1319 302
13. Inquiry held at Oxford in 1319 as to the advisability of
allowing John Culvard to grant a parcel of ground to the
Friars Minors 303
14. Grant of a parcel of ground by John de Grey de Rotherfield 305
=B. Miscellaneous Documents.=
1. Food for the Friars Minors and others, 1244 307
2. Adam Marsh as royal _nuncius_, 1247 307
3. For the same, 1257 308
4. The Church of the Minorites used as a Sanctuary, 1284-5 308
5. Royal grant of 50 marcs, 1289 308
6. Decree of the General Chapter at Paris, 1292 309
7. Royal grant of 50 marcs, 1323 309
8. ‘Receptor Denariorum’ of the Grey Friars, 1341 310
9. Goods and chattels of Friar John Welle, S.T.P., 1378 311
10. Expulsion of foreign Minorites, 1388 312
11. William Woodford; confirmation of his privileges by
Boniface IX, 1396 312
12. Appointment of a lecturer to the Convent at Hereford,
c. 1400 313
13. Decree of the General Chapter at Florence, 1467 314
14. Recovery of debt from a Sheriff, 1488 315
15. Documents relating to the lease of a garden at the Grey
Friars to Richard Leke, 1513-1514 316
16. Extracts from the Will of Richard Leke, 1526 318
17. An ex-warden called to account, 1529 318
=C. Controversy between the Friars Preachers and Friars Minors
at Oxford, 1269= 320
=D. Supplications and Graces from the Registers of Congregation.=
John David, 1450/1, 1454/5 336
John Sunday, 1453/4 336
Richard Ednam, 1462, 1463 336
Walter Goodfeld, 1506-1510 337
John Thornall, 1525 338
Thomas Kirkham, 1527 338
INDEX 341
CORRIGENDA.
P. 6, _n._ 5, _for_ tempora, _read_ temporalem.
P. 33. There was no house of Grey Friars at Evesham. Simon de Montfort was
buried by the monks of Evesham (_see_ Rishanger). The _Miracula Symonis de
Montfort_, however, bears evident traces of Franciscan influence.
P. 49, _n._ 3, _for_ Church, Quarterly Review, _read_ Church Quarterly
Review.
P. 54, _l._ 11, _for_ because, _read_ became.
P. 56, _n._ 5 _for_ quos, _read_ quas.
THE GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD.
_PART I._
_HISTORY OF THE CONVENT, A. D. 1224-1538._
CHAPTER I.
EARLY YEARS.
Arrival of the Franciscans at Oxford.--Their early Poverty, and
Cheerfulness.--Oxford Friars as Peacemakers, and Crusaders.--Relations
to the University, and to the first Colleges.--Their strict observance
of the Rule.
The Franciscans first arrived in England in 1224[3]. On Tuesday, the 10th
of September in that year (to follow the account of Friar Thomas
Eccleston, the earliest historian of the Order in this country), a
company of nine friars, four of them clerks and five laymen, landed at
Dover, under the leadership of Agnellus of Pisa, the first Provincial
Minister. After staying two days at Canterbury, four of them proceeded to
London; and at the end of the month, two of these, Friar Richard of
Ingeworth and Friar Richard of Devon, set out for Oxford. It is perhaps to
this place that the well-known story told by Bartholomew of Pisa properly
belongs[4]. As they neared Oxford they were stopped by the floods, and
finding themselves at nightfall ‘in a vast wood which lies between Bath
and Oxford,’ they sought refuge ‘for the love of God’ at a grange
belonging to the monks of Abingdon, ‘lest they should perish from hunger
or the wild beasts in the forest.’ The prior, judging them to be
jesters[5], had them turned out; but a young monk, when the rest had gone
to bed, put them into a hayloft and brought them bread and beer. That
night he had a dream. The prior and his brethren were summoned before the
judgment-seat of Christ; and
‘there came a certain poor man, humble and despised, in the habit of
those poor friars, and he cried with a loud voice: “O most impartial
Judge, the blood of my brethren, which hath been shed this night,
crieth unto Thee. The guardians of this place have refused them meat
and lodging, although they have left all for Thy sake, and were now
coming here to seek those souls which Thou hast redeemed with Thy
blood; they would not, in fact, have refused as much to jesters and
mummers.”... Then the Judge commanded them to be hanged on the elm
that stood in that cloister.’
In the morning the young monk found his companions dead, and became an
early convert to the order of St. Francis.
On their arrival at Oxford, the two friars were received with great
kindness by the Dominicans.
‘They ate in their refectory, and slept in their dormitory, like
conventuals for eight days[6].’
They then hired a house in the parish of St. Ebbe from Robert le
Mercer[7]. Alms sufficient for the purpose were probably already
forthcoming, as the new Order did not have to wait long for recognition.
Though they only occupied this house till the following summer[8], they
were there joined by ‘many honest bachelors and many eminent men’[9]; and
it may have been owing to this increase in their numbers that they left
their first abode in 1225 and hired a house with ground attached from
Richard the Miller[10]. It is significant of the rapid growth of opinion
in their favour that Richard
‘within a year conferred the land and house on the community of the
town for the use of the Friars Minors.’
Enthusiasm and self-sacrifice were the powerful agents which ensured
success and favour to the early Franciscans, and many are the stories of
their primitive poverty and its effects; and if the convent at Oxford was
not especially distinguished like that at Cambridge by ‘_paucilitas
pecuniae_,’ or like that at York by ‘_zelus paupertatis_[11],’ the Oxford
Minorites, during the time of Agnellus at least, departed but little from
the ideal of their founder[12], and lived the life of the poor among whom
they ministered. The pangs of hunger were not unknown in the convent; and
on one occasion the friars were in debt to the amount of ten marks for
food[13]. Their first houses were mean and small--too small for the
numbers who flocked to their Order[14]; and the infirmary was
‘so low that the height of the walls did not much exceed the height of
a man[15].’
When at length they built their church, the brethren worked with their own
hands, and a bishop and an abbat who had assumed the coarse habit of the
friars are said to have ‘carried water and sand and stones for the
building of the place[16].’
The appearance of the Minorites was no less humble than their buildings.
Their habits of coarse gray or brown cloth[17], tied round the waist with
a cord, often worn and patched, as Grostete loved to see them, hardly[18]
distinguished them from ‘simple rustics[19].’ In the convent at Oxford,
pillows were forbidden, and the use of shoes was permitted only to the
infirm or old, and that by special licence[20]. We hear of two of the
brethren returning from a chapter held at Oxford at Christmas time singing
as they
‘picked their way along the rugged path over the frozen mud and rigid
snow, whilst the blood lay in the track of their naked feet, without
their being conscious of it[21].’
Even from the robbers and murderers who infested the woods near Oxford the
Barefoot Friars were safe[22].
‘Three things,’ said Friar Albert, Minister General, ‘tended to the
exaltation of the Order,--bare feet, coarse garments, and the rejecting of
money[23]’; and the Oxford Franciscans were as zealous in the last respect
as in the other two. The Archdeacon of Northampton sent a bag of money to
Friar Adam Marsh, and when the latter refused it, the messenger threw it
down in the cell and left it:--
‘Wherefore,’ writes Adam to the Archdeacon, ‘the bearer of these
presents has at the instance of the brethren taken the said money,
just as it was, sealed with your seal, to your lordship, to dispose of
according to your pleasure[24].’
The evidence of the Public Records, containing scattered notices of grants
from the Crown, is striking on this point, and the poverty of these early
Franciscans can hardly be better illustrated than by the means taken to
relieve it. During the long reign of Henry III, the Patent, Close, and
Liberate Rolls contain only three grants of money to the house of the
Minorites at Oxford, and all of them are due to exceptional circumstances.
They are, ten marks for the support of a provincial chapter in 1238,
60_s._ for their houses in 1245 in lieu of six oaks which the king had
before given them, and three marks for the fabric of their church in
1246[25]. The alms to the house at Oxford are almost wholly in kind, and
consist chiefly of supplies of firewood from the royal forests round
Oxford. The earliest recorded instance of royal bounty was a grant of
thirteen oaks in ‘Brehull’ (Brill) forest for fuel on the 9th Jan.
1231[26]. A few years later they received fifteen cartloads of brushwood
from Shotover forest[27], and in 1237 fifteen oaks in Wychwood Forest ‘to
make charcoal[28].’ Similar notices occur almost every year--sometimes
twice a year--throughout the reign of Henry III[29]. In 1240 the keepers
of the wines at Southampton were ordered to deliver one cask of Gascon
wine, of the king’s bounty, to the Friars Minors at Oxford ‘to celebrate
masses[30].’ In 1248 the Sheriff of Oxford received orders to
‘give to the Friars Minors of Oxford one cask of wine of the six casks
which he took into the king’s hand of the wine of those who lately
killed a clerk in the town of Oxford[31].’
But a fortnight later the king repented of his generosity and assigned the
same cask to one of his numerous relatives[32]. Of more interest, as
showing that the friars were really classed with the poor of the town, is
a royal brief of the 12th of Dec. 1244 to the bailiffs of Oxford, bidding
them
‘give of the ferm of their town to Friar Roger, King’s Almoner, on
Wednesday the morrow of the feast of St. Lucy the Virgin, ten marks,
to feed a thousand paupers and the Friars Preachers and Minors of
Oxford, for the soul of the Lady Empress sister of the King, on the
day of her anniversary[33].’
With all their poverty and holiness they were singularly free from that
form of piety which consists in wearing a sad countenance and appearing
unto men to fast. We hear indeed of strict silence, of constant prayer, of
vigils that lasted the whole night[34].
‘Yet,’ continues Eccleston[35], ‘the brethren were so full of fun
among themselves, that a mute could hardly refrain from laughter at
the sight. So when the young friars of Oxford laughed too frequently,
it was enjoined on one that as often as he laughed he should be
punished. Now it happened that, when he had received no punishments in
one day, and yet could not restrain himself from laughing, he had a
vision one night, that the whole convent stood as usual in the choir,
and the friars were beginning to laugh as usual, and behold the
crucifix which stood at the door of the choir turned towards them as
though alive, and said: “They are the sons of Corah who in the hour of
chanting laugh and sleep.”... On hearing this dream, the friars were
frightened and behaved without very noticeable laughter[36].’
Grostete said to a Friar Preacher, ‘Three things are necessary to temporal
health--to eat, sleep, and be merry[37].’ Excessive austerity was
discountenanced by the authorities of the Oxford convent. Friar Albert of
Pisa, who was himself ‘always cheerful and merry in the society of the
brethren[38],’ compelled Friar Eustace de Merc, contrary to custom, to eat
fish, saying that the Order lost many good persons through their
indiscretion[39]. Grostete again
‘commanded a melancholy friar to drink a cup full of the best wine as
a penance, and when he had drunk it up, though most unwillingly, he
said to him, “Dear brother, if you often performed a penance like
that, you would have a better ordered conscience[40].”’
The friars lovingly treasured up the great bishop’s puns and jokes and
wise sayings[41], and were always ready to tell or appreciate a good
story. From first to last they had the reputation of being excellent
company[42], and were welcome at the tables of the rich or well-to-do[43].
They were allowed by the rule to
‘eat of all manner of meats which be set before them[44],’
a practice which occasionally caused some scandal[45]; and Friar Albert of
Pisa ordered them to keep silence in the house of hosts, except among the
preachers and friars of other provinces[46]. Like St. Francis himself, the
Oxford friars often possessed the courtesy and charm of manner which is
born of sympathy[47]; and it was perhaps to this quality that their
employment as diplomatic agents is to be attributed. Thus Agnellus was
chosen in 1233 to negotiate with the rebellious Earl Marshall and try to
bring him back to his allegiance[48]. Adam Marsh was on more than one
occasion sent beyond the sea as royal emissary[49], and Edward I sent
Oxford Minorites to treat for peace with his enemies[50]. But to the
mediaeval mind, there was a cause more sacred than that of peace or good
government; and the Franciscans would not have had their great
influence--would not have become leaders of men throughout the world--had
they not shared the one ideal, which still even in the thirteenth century
appealed to every class in every country of Europe. The Crusades attracted
the scholastic philosopher no less than the baron with his sins to
expiate, or the serf with his liberty to win. It was partly to increase
his influence as a missionary[51] that Adam of Oxford, one of the first
‘masters’ who joined the Order[52], took the vows of St. Francis; against
the wishes of his brethren in England, who hoped to keep among them so
famous and learned a convert, and who indeed feared lest he should come
under heretical influences[53], he went to Gregory IX, and at his own
prayer was sent by the Pope to preach to the Saracens[54]. When Prince
Edward went to the Holy Land in 1270, he took with him as preacher Friar
William de Hedley, the lecturer and regent master of the Friars Minors at
Oxford[55]. Hedley died before the army reached Acre; but these learned
friars did not flinch when summoned to meet a sterner fate. In 1289
Tripoli was captured by the Saracens: an English friar led the last charge
of the despairing Christians, carrying aloft the cross till his arms were
hewn off;
‘the above-mentioned friar,’ continues the chronicler, ‘who by his
example provoked very many to martyrdom, had been no small space of
time warden of the Oxford Convent[56].’
The friars of both Orders soon took a leading part in the affairs of the
University. As Bishop of Lincoln[57], Grostete continued to exercise a
kind of paternal authority over the University[58], and his high character
and long connexion with Oxford gave him an influence which was denied to
his successors. It was natural that this influence should be reflected on
the Franciscans, whom he had taken under his especial care and among whom
was his ‘true friend and faithful counsellor[59]’ Adam Marsh. The latter
was specially summoned to the congregation to hear and advise on the
answer sent by Grostete to some petitions of the University[60], and we
find him interceding with the Bishop on behalf of the Chancellor, Radulph
of Sempringham[61]. One of the most important stages in the constitutional
development of the University is marked by the charter of Henry III in
1244, which constituted a special tribunal for the scholars, and formed
the basis of the Chancellor’s jurisdiction. On the 11th of May of the same
year, a deed of acknowledgment was executed at Reading and signed and
sealed on behalf of the University by the Prior of the Friars Preachers,
the Minister of the Friars Minors, the Chancellor of the University, the
Archdeacons of Lincoln and Cornwall, and Friar Robert Bacon[62]. Edward I
in 1275[63] appointed ‘Friars John de Pecham and Oliver de Encourt’ royal
commissioners to decide a suit between Master Robert de Flemengvill[64]
and a Jewess named Countess, the wife of Isaac Pulet, which had long been
pending in the Chancellor’s court; this however was not to be treated as a
precedent to the prejudice of the Chancellor’s jurisdiction.
It is probable that the example afforded by the houses of student friars
was not lost on the founders of the early colleges. We know that Walter de
Merton was a friend of Adam Marsh[65], and a benefactor of the friars, but
it would be dangerous to attempt to trace any direct Franciscan influence
in the statutes of his college[66]. There is however no doubt about the
connexion of the Franciscans with the foundation of Balliol College. Sir
John de Balliol died in 1269 without having established his house for poor
scholars on a permanent footing. His widow Devorguila first gave them a
definite organisation in 1282. According to an old tradition[67], she was
induced to take this step by her Franciscan confessor, Friar Richard de
Slikeburne. It is clear that the latter was her most trusted and energetic
agent in carrying out the plan. Devorguila urges him by all means in his
power to promote the perpetuation of ‘our house of Balliol[68],’ and the
executors of Sir John de Balliol assigned certain moneys to the scholars
of the house
‘with the consent of Devorguila and at the advice of Friar Richard de
Slikeburne[69].’
Nor was the connexion merely a transitory one. The statutes of 1282[70]
are addressed to Friar Hugh de Hertilpoll and Master William de Menyl, who
are evidently the two ‘proctors’ mentioned in the document. To the
proctors (who did not belong to the house but were in the position of
permanent visitors) was entrusted the institution of the principal after
his election by the scholars, together with a general supervision over the
economy of the college. They alone could expel a refractory scholar, and
they were constituted the special guardians of the poorer students[71].
Nothing remains to show how long the first proctors held their office, or
how their successors were appointed. It is probable however that the
office was intended to be a perpetual one[72]--not a temporary expedient
to be called into existence from time to time,--and further that one of
the proctors was always a Franciscan. Two other documents bearing on the
subject are known to exist. In 1325 a doubt had arisen whether the members
of the college might study any science except the liberal arts; it was
declared to be unlawful to do so and contrary to the mind of the founder,
and was consequently forbidden
‘by Masters Robert of Leicester, of the Order of Friars Minors,
S.T.P., and Nicholas de Tyngewick, M.D. and S.T.B., then _Magistri
Extranei_ of the said House[73].’
The second document[74] is a letter dated 1433 addressed to the Bishop of
London by
‘Richard Roderham, S.T.P., and John Feckyngtone of the order of
Minorites in Oxford, Rectors of Balliol College.’
The Rectors having, ‘according to the exigency of the office which we
discharge upon the rule of the said college and the observance of the
statutes thereof,’ inquired into the working of the first statute,
decided, with the consent of the majority of the house, that it was
prejudicial to the college, and asked the Bishop to consent to the
modification of it[75].
It will be readily admitted that in the thirteenth century the Oxford
Franciscans deserved their high reputation. It is true, that frequent
complaints are heard of the decline of the Order[76]--that many
relaxations had been introduced into the Rule. But these were not demanded
by the English province. When Haymo was General, orders were issued by the
Chapter that friars should be elected in each province to note any points
in the Rule which seemed to require revision, and send them to the
Minister General. Eccleston[77] gives the names of three friars elected
for this purpose in England--Adam Marsh, the foremost of the Oxford
friars; Peter of Tewkesbury, Custodian of Oxford; and Henry de Burford.
‘Having marked some articles, the said friars sent them to the
General, in a schedule without a seal, beseeching him, by the
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ, to let the Rule stand, as it
was handed down by St. Francis, at the dictation of the Holy
Spirit[78].’
CHAPTER II.
PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS.
First Settlement inside the City Wall.--Acquisition of the houses of
W. de Wileford (1229) and Robert Oen (1236).--Increase of the _area_
in 1244-1245.--Grants from the King, Thomas Valeynes, and
others.--Island in the Thames, 1245.--Messuage of Laurence Wych,
1247.--Friars of the Penitence of Jesus Christ.--Their property in
Oxford granted to the Minorites by Clement V, and by Edward II,
1310.--Grants from various persons, 1310.--Richard Cary and John
Culvard, 1319.--Walter Morton, 1321.--To what classes did the donors
belong?
Absence of information about the buildings at the Grey
Friars.--Original houses and chapel.--School built by Agnellus.--The
stricter friars oppose the tendency to build, without
success.--Building of the new church, 1246, &c.--Its site and
appearance.--William of Worcester’s description of it.--Richard
Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall, buried there, 1272.--Other tombs in the
church, especially that of Agnellus.--Grave of Roger
Bacon.--Cloisters, Chapter House, Refectory, and other conventual
buildings.--Conduit and Gates.
For about a hundred years from the date of their settlement in Oxford, the
Friars Minors were gradually acquiring property. We have seen that after a
short sojourn in the house of Robert le Mercer, the house of Richard le
Muliner became their first permanent abode. The position of the former
cannot be at all definitely ascertained; it was in the parish of St.
Ebbe’s[79], probably near the church and within the city walls[80]. Wood
places it between the church and the Watergate. But he is certainly wrong
in the position he ascribes to the second house, namely,
‘without the towne wall, and about a stone’s cast from their first
hired house[81].’
The house of Richard the Miller was undoubtedly between the wall and
Freren Street (Church Street). In 1244 Henry III allowed the friars to
throw down the wall of the town in order to ‘connect their new place with
the old one[82].’ Even apart from the fact that the Mercer’s house did not
at this time belong to them, it is obvious that the houses which they
acquired in 1224 and 1225 would not in 1244 be distinguished as the ‘old
place’ and the ‘new place’ respectively. The ‘new place’ refers to lands
which came into their possession about the time of this grant, and of
which Wood knew nothing, while the Miller’s house formed part of the ‘old
place.’
In fact, several years elapsed before the friars obtained property outside
the city wall, their first efforts being directed to secure the land
between the wall and Freren Street. It was not long before their cramped
area was enlarged. In the Mayoralty of John Pady[83] the citizens of
Oxford subscribed[84] forty-three marks sterling to buy from William, son
of Richard de Wileford, his house in St. Ebbe’s, with all its
appurtenances, ‘to house the Friars Minors for ever,’ the said good men of
Oxford giving to William one pound of cummin annually in lieu of all
service[85]. The next grant of which we find mention seems also to have
been an act of municipal, rather than of private, charity. In 1236[86]
Robert, son of Robert Oen, had given them a house adjoining their land, on
condition that he,
‘having been a free tenant of the prior and brethren of St. John of
Jerusalem in England in the aforesaid place,’
should have the same privilege attaching to his new house in the parish of
St. Michael at the North Gate. This house of Robert Oen’s in St. Ebbe’s
was one of the ‘mural mansions,’ on the occupiers of which the duty of
repairing the city wall fell[87]. The obligation, however, was now, when
the house came into the hands of the friars, willingly undertaken with the
King’s assent by the Mayor and good men of Oxford.
Under the ministry of Agnellus any tendency to accumulate property was
rigorously suppressed[88], nor does his successor Albert appear to have
been more lenient[89]. But under Haymo of Faversham (1238-9) and William
of Nottingham (1239-51) a different spirit began to prevail, and one far
less in accordance with the original idea of the Order. Haymo
‘preferred that the friars should have ample areas and should
cultivate them, that they might have the fruits of the earth at home,
rather than beg them from others[90].’
And under William of Nottingham the Oxford house gained a large increase
of territory[91].
It was in 1245 that this took place, and a remarkably full series of
records relating to the event is still extant. By a deed dated 22nd
December, 1244[92], the King gave the Friars Minors permission,
‘for the greater quiet and security of their habitation, to inclose
the street which extends under the wall of Oxford, from the gate which
is called Watergate[93] in the parish of St. Ebbe, up to the postern
in the same wall towards the Castle; so that a crenellated wall like
the rest of the wall of the same town be made round the foresaid
dwelling, beginning from the west side of Watergate, and reaching
southwards as far as the bank of the Thames, and extending along the
bank westwards as far as the fee of the Abbat of Bec in the parish of
St. Bodhoc, and then turning again northwards till it joins the old
wall of the foresaid borough on the east side of the small postern;’
and they were further allowed to throw down the old wall which stretched
across their habitation. But in 1248[94] this grant, as far as it related
to the wall, was cancelled; the old wall was to be repaired, and the
proposed new wall was not mentioned.
There can be little doubt that in December, 1244, the friars did not
possess the land which they were then allowed to enclose; it is indeed
very doubtful whether they had any property south of the wall. Possibly
they may have acquired already the place which they held in 1278,
‘of the gift of Agnes widow of Guydo[95], which the said Agnes had by
descent from her predecessors, and they pay thence to Walter Goldsmith
one pound of cummin[96].’
The value was then unknown, nor is the position specified[97]. It was,
however, no doubt situated in the suburb of St. Ebbe’s parish. Two other
plots of ground are mentioned in the same document as belonging to the
Friars: of one of these (that granted by Thomas Walonges) we have accurate
information, and shall mention it in its due place. Of the other nothing
further is known than that they held it by grant from Master Richard de
Mepham. But the grant was probably of later date than 1244. Richard was
Archdeacon of Oxford in 1263, became Dean of Lincoln in 1273, and probably
died in 1274 at the council of Lyons[98].
But the royal grant in the Patent Roll of 29 Henry III is explained by the
fact that the Franciscans, or rather their benefactors, were already
negotiating for the transfer of a large part of the property there
described, if not of the whole of it.
In February, 1245, Thomas Valeynes, or Valoignes (or Walonges as he is
called in the Inquisition of 6 & 7 Edward I), carried into effect a plan
for the benefit of the Friars Minors which it must have taken long to
bring to a successful conclusion[99]. It consisted in begging or buying
out a number of holders of property in the south-west ‘suburb of Oxford,’
and granting in one case at least tenements in another part of the town as
compensation. Thus, in exchange for two messuages with their appurtenances
on the south-west of the town, Symon son of Benedict and Leticia his
wife, received one messuage outside the North Gate, together with a
building then held by Hugh Marshall,
‘which same messuage and building were formerly held by Benedictus le
Mercer father of the foresaid Symon.’
One messuage with appurtenances was acquired from John Costard and Margery
his wife, two from Warin of Dorchester and Juliana his wife, one from
William ‘le Barbeur’ and Alice his wife, one from Henry ‘le Teler’ and
Alice his wife, and a little later[100] one curtilage ‘in the suburb of
Oxford in the parish of St. Budoc,’ from John Aylmer and Christiana his
wife. All these eight tenements Thomas de Valeynes, ‘at the petition’ of
the former owners, assigned
‘to the increase of the area in which the Friars Minors dwelling at
Oxford are lodged in pure and perpetual alms free and quit of all
secular service and exaction for ever;’
and we may reasonably conclude that they filled the space from the City
Wall on the north to Trill Mill Stream on the south, and from Littlegate
Street on the east to a line drawn from the ‘fee of the Abbat of Bec in
the parish of St. Bodhoc’s’ to the West Gate on the west[101].
Shortly after this, namely, on the 22nd of April, 1245[102], Henry III
gave the Friars, to enlarge their new area,
‘our island in the Thames, which we have bought from Henry son of
Henry Simeon,’
with permission to make a bridge over the arm of the river dividing it
from their houses, and to enclose it with a wall, or in any other way
which would insure ‘the security of their houses and the tranquillity of
their religion,’ On the same day[103] the King ordered the Barons of the
Exchequer to deduct from the fine of sixty marks,
‘imposed on Henry son of Henry Simeonis because he was implicated
in[104] the murder of a scholar of Oxford, twenty-five marcs, for
twenty-five marcs which we owed to Henry Simeonis his father for an
island in the Thames at Oxford which we have bought from him, and
which said marcs he begged should be reckoned to his son in the
aforesaid fine.’
The next grant is dated the 27th of November, 1246[105]. The King
announces that he has handed over to the friars, for the enlargement of
their premises, the whole messuage, with its appurtenances, which Laurence
Wych (or Wyth), Mayor of Oxford, committed to him for that purpose,
desiring them to enclose the same as they shall see fit:
‘and the Sheriff of Oxfordshire was commanded to receive the messuage
in place of the King for the use of the said friars.’
It is quite uncertain where this land lay, and whether Wych granted it in
his public or private capacity.
For the next fifty years, excepting the undated grants of Richard Mepham
and Agnes widow of Guydo, which probably belong to this period, there is
no record of a gift of land to the Minorites. On the east they had already
reached the permanent limit of their property[106], and the Friars of the
Penitence of Jesus Christ settled about the year 1260 on the ground lying
to the west. This formed the parish of St. Budoc. In 1262[107] the King
allowed these friars to build an oratory here; in 1265[108] he granted
them, as patron, the church of St. Budoc (which adjoined their premises,
and which, owing to the removal or death of the parishioners, was too
impoverished to support one chaplain), ‘to make thence a chapel for
themselves.’ With the church they acquired[109]
‘the cemetery and the houses standing in the same and belonging to the
said church,’
with the proviso that the cemetery should always be treated as
consecrated[110] ground. The value of the church was 20_s._ a year[111].
At the Council of Lyons in 1274 the Friars of the Penitence of Jesus
Christ, or ‘Friars of the Sack,’ were forbidden to admit new members[112],
and the Order came to an end when the old members died out. The Minorites
and their friends therefore applied themselves to secure the property. As
early as 1296 Boniface VIII wrote to the Bishop of Lincoln, ordering
him[113] to allow the Friars Minors to take possession of the house or
area of the Friars of the Sack, whenever the five remaining brethren
should die or transfer themselves to other religious Orders. At the court
of Clement V, the first of the Avignon popes, the claims of the Minorites
were urged by John of Britanny, Earl of Richmond; and Clement issued a
Bull in their favour, dated the 27th of May, 1309 (VI Kal. Jun. A{o}
IV)[114].
‘In a petition exhibited to us on your part,’ runs the document, ‘it
is contained that owing to the narrowness of your place at Oxford, you
and other friars, there flocking together to the University from
divers parts of the world in great multitude, do endure manifold wants
and various inconveniences. Since therefore the place of the Friars of
the Penitence of Jesus Christ of the same place of Oxford adjoining
your place, is shortly, as is believed, to be relinquished by the said
Friars, to remain at the disposal of the Apostolic Seat, according to
the tenor of the Constitution published by Pope Gregory X, our
predecessor, in the Council of Lyons, it is humbly prayed us, that we
deign to concede to you that place for the enlargement of your place
aforesaid.’
This prayer the Pope goes on to grant ‘of his special favour,’ mentioning
the earnest supplications of John of Britanny[115] on behalf of the
friars.
The King, however, also had a claim to dispose of lands which his
grandfather had granted, and which, in default of heirs or successors,
legally escheated to the Crown. By Letters Patent dated the 28th of March,
1310[116], Edward II assigned to the Friars Minors the property which
Henry III had previously given to the Penitentiary Friars, with the same
stipulation as to the cemetery. The land is accurately described; it was
contiguous to the place of the Friars Minors, in the suburb of Oxford,
twenty and a half perches long from north to south, six perches wide at
the south end, two and a half at the north, and four perches seven feet in
the middle.
Letters Patent of the same day[117] confirmed the grant of four other
parcels of ground to the Friars Minors: some of these may have been
previously held by the Friars of the Sack. The ‘plot of ground in Oxford,’
five perches two feet from east to west, two perches and a half from north
to south, conferred on the Minorites by John Wyz and Emma his wife, may
have been within the walls, near the West Gate; the others were in the
suburb. Henry Tyeys gave land measuring six perches by five, and lying
between the site of St. Budoc’s Church and the Thames (Trill Mill Stream);
Richard le Lodere’s land, measuring fourteen and a half perches five feet,
by four perches and three feet, and stretching from the Thames to the
above-mentioned place of Henry Tyeys, was included in the grant, as was a
larger plot[118], measuring sixteen and a half perches from the Thames to
the ‘royal way,’ and ten perches in breadth; which seems to have included
the south part of Paradise Gardens[119].
All these places are described as adjoining the property of the Warden and
Friars Minors of Oxford.
It was probably at the instance of the Crown and as a protest against the
papal claims that the Minorites a few years later formally surrendered to
the King the area which had belonged to the Penitentiaries, ‘in its
entirety as it came into their hands,’ and received it back of the King’s
special favour in pure and perpetual alms[120].
One fragment of the Penitentiary Friars’ property came into the hands of
the Franciscans somewhat later. In October, 1319, an _Inquisitio ad quod
Damnum_[121] was held in Oxford to decide whether Richard Cary could,
without prejudice to the King or others, bestow on the Friars Minors a
place in the suburb of Oxford, adjacent to their property, and measuring
five perches in length and five in breadth. The jurors declared that the
grant would not be injurious to the King or others, and that Cary
possessed sufficient property in the town to discharge all his civic
duties. The place ‘at the time when it was built’ was worth 20_s._ a year,
but now, owing to its ruinous condition, only 2_s._ Cary held it for a
rent of 8_s._ a year of Johanna, wife of Walter of Wycombe, Agatha her
sister, and John son of Alice, who was wife of Andrew Culvard, the heirs
of Henry Owayn; they held it of the Prior of Steventon, paying 4_d._ a
year in lieu of all services. The plot was therefore the fee of the Abbat
of Bec mentioned above, and is probably the same as
‘the place which the Friars of the Penitence bought of Walter
Aurifaber, and they pay thence to the Prior of Steventon 2_s._[122]’
A few months previously a similar inquisition[123] was held at Oxford,
which resulted in an addition to the Minorite property on the east side
within the wall. This was a plot of ground of the annual value of 2_s._,
five perches by six, granted to them by John Culvard. The town, however,
claimed the right,
‘at all times when it shall be necessary, to have free entry and
egress thence to restore, repair and defend the wall of the said
town.’
In 1321[124] Walter Morton obtained leave to grant in mortmain to the
Franciscans a place with its appurtenances, measuring five perches by
five, in the suburb of Oxford; and similar licence was given to John de
Grey de Retherfeld[125] in 1337 to bestow on them a tenement, six perches
by five, lying next their habitation on the east side within the town.
This brings us to the end of the list of grants of landed property to the
Oxford Minorites--a list which we may claim to be fairly complete. It is
interesting to note from what classes the donors were drawn. Most of them
were men of business--the leading tradesmen of the town[126]. Three of
them, Laurence Wych, John Culvard, and Richard Cary, were at various times
Mayors of Oxford, and the two latter represented the city in
Parliament[127]. Richard Mepham belonged to the higher rank of
ecclesiastics. Master Thomas de Valeynes seems to have been a person of
some importance in Oxfordshire and the adjoining counties[128].
Buildings.
Of the buildings of the Friars Minors in Oxford we have disappointingly
little information--with the exception of the boundary wall already
mentioned there are no remains of their house now visible. Excavations
might perhaps yield interesting results, but most of the ground is thickly
built over, and the information derived from the records and other sources
is rarely precise enough to enable us to identify with any certainty the
sites of the various buildings.
For the first twenty years the Friary must have presented a very modest,
not to say mean, appearance, and the brethren were probably contented to
take the accommodation afforded by the houses, which were granted them,
with little alteration. The infirmary built by Agnellus has already been
noticed. After they had been nearly a year in Oxford, the friars built a
small chapel[129]. In 1232, the King gave them
‘thirty beams in the royal forest of Savernak for the fabric of their
chapel which they are having built at Oxford,’
adding that
‘if any one in the same bailiwick shall wish to give them timber, the
bailiff shall permit them without hindrance to carry through the
forest free of toll oaks to the number of thirty[130].’
Probably this refers to the original chapel. It had a choir where the
brethren attended and celebrated divine service[131], and at, or over, the
door of which stood a crucifix, or wooden cross[132]. It was here, in the
choir before the altar, that Agnellus was buried in a ‘leaden box,’ as
became the _zelator paupertatis_[133]. The chapel was pulled down when the
new church was finished[134]. Under the auspices of Agnellus rose their
first school, which was apparently the finest of their early
buildings[135]. Whether this was afterwards enlarged, or whether new
schools were built on the same site or elsewhere, there is no longer any
means of deciding.
These houses were situated within the wall, and it was not till the
increase of the ‘area’ between 1240 and 1250 that building on a large
scale was commenced between the wall and Trill Mill Stream[136]. The
tendency to build was strenuously resisted by the stricter party among the
friars--the party which upheld the early traditions of the Order.
Eccleston relates how an Oxford friar appeared after death to the
custodian and warned him that,
‘if the friars were not damned for their excess in building, they
would at any rate be severely punished[137].’
An obscure passage in a letter of Adam Marsh probably refers to the same
tendency; even novices, he laments, are taught to neglect the things of
the spirit
‘for flesh and blood, for mud and walls, for wood and stone, for any
kind of worldly gain[138].’
The opposition of the older generation was, however, unavailing, and a
‘stately and magnificent[139]’ convent began to rise. But of the new
friary, too, there are but scanty notices. No English king bestowed on the
house of Franciscans at Oxford that loving care which Henry III bestowed
on the Minorite Church at Reading, or Edward II on the Dominican Church
which rose over the tomb of his ill-fated favourite at Langley. From royal
grants we learn that building was going on at the Grey Friars of Oxford in
1240, when ten oaks were given to them by the King for timber[140]. In
1245 (July 7th),
‘the Sheriff of Berkshire was ordered to give to the Friars Minors of
Oxford for the works of their houses sixty shillings instead of six
oaks which the King gave them before[141];’
and a further grant of six oaks for timber in 1272 shows that the
operations were of a protracted nature[142]. From similar sources we find
that the Church, which was dedicated to St. Francis, was in process of
erection in February, 1246[143], and February, 1248[144]. At the latter
date the friars are again permitted to
‘enclose the street which extends under the wall of Oxford from the
Watergate ... to the small postern in the wall near the Castle.... We
grant also that the north side of the chapel built and to be built in
the aforesaid street may supply the interruption of the wall as far as
it is to reach, the other breaches in the wall being fully repaired as
before, except the small postern in the wall, through which the said
friars can go and return from the new place where they now live, to
the former place in which they used to live.’
It would appear from this that the street was outside the wall. Mr.
Parker, however, states positively that it was ‘the inner road’ which they
were permitted to enclose[145]; in Wheeler’s Garden, south-west of St.
Ebbe’s Churchyard, there used to be a line of old walling, running
parallel to the city wall inside, and the space between these walls may
have been the street in question[146]. It must be remembered, however,
that the friars had already in 1244 acquired the road with the right to
enclose it, and to throw down this section of the city wall. In 1248,
therefore, we may well believe that little existed of the wall, which on
the south side was never a very prominent feature. The church running due
east and west would extend along and across the site of the wall, the west
end being outside, the east end inside. From the south end of Paradise
Place, where the wall juts out southwards for a few yards, to a point
about the north end of King’s Terrace, there have long been no signs of
the city wall; and it is probably here that the Grey Friars’ Church stood.
The tradition is still preserved in the name Church Place. Of the
appearance of the church we know little. The roof was tiled[147], like
that of the Grey Friars’ Church at Reading; it is probable the east end
was flat, and there was no triforium[148]. Wood thinks that one of the
eight towers which figured in the pageant at the inthronization of Warham
in 1504, represented the tower of the Grey Friars[149]. William of
Worcester has left a somewhat puzzling[150] description of the church in
1480[151].
‘The length of the choir of the church of St. Francis at Oxford
contains 68 steps. The length from the door (_valva_) of the choir to
the west window contains 90 steps; so in the whole length it contains
150 (?) steps. The width of the nave of the said church on the east
(_ab orienti parte_) contains with the aisle 28 steps. The length of
the nave from the south side to the north door contains 40 steps only,
and there are ten chapels in the said north nave of the church. The
width of the north nave of the church contains 20 steps. The width of
each chapel contains 6 steps, and so the width of the whole nave of
the church with the ten chapels contains 26 steps. And each chapel
contains in length 6 steps. And each glass window of the ten chapels
contains three dayes (or lights) glazed.’
Reckoning William’s ‘steps’ at half a yard each[152], and correcting his
apparent mistake in addition, we find that the church measured
seventy-nine yards from east to west, the choir containing thirty-four
yards, and the nave forty-five. At its widest part the church measured
twenty yards, ten yards of which were taken up by the north aisle. Hence
the width of the nave properly so called, and of the choir, which in
friars’ churches is, where it exists, of the same width as the nave[153],
was ten yards. The choir was aisleless, and the north aisle was probably
the only one in the church: this, too, narrowed from ten yards to four
towards the east end of the nave. In 1535 Friar Henry Standish, Bishop of
St. Asaph, bequeathed £40 ‘for the building of an aisle joining to the
church of the Grey friars, Oxon[154],’ probably on the south side, but it
is almost certain that this was never built.
The wider aisle must have extended nearly the whole length of the nave to
allow space for the north door and the ten chapels, all of which were
built on to the north wall. They would be in part sepulchral chantries,
supported by noble families or gilds, often containing the image or shrine
of some saint, while the shrine of the patron saint stood behind the high
altar. They were presumably later additions, and whether the church in its
original form attained the proportions here described must remain
doubtful. But there is no reason to suppose it was afterwards enlarged to
any great extent. In the thirteenth century, benefactors, great and small,
were willing and eager to help the friars to raise those splendid
buildings which drew forth the fierce denunciations of later reformers;
and though much of the church was doubtless built, like that at London,
‘from good common alms[155],’ there can be little question that the chief
‘founder and benefactor’ was the wealthy Richard Plantagenet, Earl of
Cornwall, and King of the Romans[156]. It was in the choir of this church
that his heart was buried[157]
‘under a sumptuous pyramid of admirable workmanship[158].’
Here, too, five years later the remains of his third wife, Beatrice of
Falkenstein, were interred, ‘before the great altar[159];’ and many other
monuments of nobles and famous men must have given the interior of the
church an imposing appearance. Among those buried here were several of the
Golafres: the tomb of Sir John Golafre, who died at Quinton, Bucks, in
1379[160], was in the chancel; that of his younger brother, William, was
probably in the same part of the church[161]. Sir John’s illegitimate son,
John Golafre, knight and lord of Langley, bequeathed his body to be buried
next his father’s, if he should die in England[162]; but
‘at the time of his death (1396) he altered his will in that part in
which he bequeathed his body to be buried in the chancel of the church
of the Friars Minors at Oxford, and willed and also bequeathed his
body to be buried in the Conventual Church of Westminster where our
lord the King shall dispose[163].’
William Lord Lovell, by a will dated 18 March, 1454/5, made provision
‘to be buried at the Grayfreris of Oxenford in suche place as I have
appoynted[164].’
The wills of less distinguished persons occasionally contain information
as to the interior of the church. In 1430 Robert Keneyshame, Bedel of the
University, willed to be buried in the Franciscan Church,
‘in the midst between the two altars beneath the highest cross in the
body of the church[165].’
James Hedyan, bachelor in both laws and principal of Eagle Hall, was
buried in the nave[166]. Agnes, wife of Michael Norton, was in 1438 buried
‘in the Conventual Church of the Friars Minors of Oxford before the
image of the blessed Mary the Virgin of Pity[167].’
And in 1526 Richard Leke, ‘late bruer of Oxford,’ desired
‘to be buried within the Graye ffreres in Oxford before the awter
where the first masse is daily vsed to be saide[168].’
But more honoured than any of these was the ‘fair stone sepulchre[169]’ in
which the body of Agnellus, the only Provincial Minister known to have
been buried at Oxford, found its final resting place. For the shrine of
Agnellus possessed all the fascination of miraculous association and
miraculous power. When the friars, many years after his death, went in the
night to remove the body from the original chapel before its demolition,
‘they found the little leaden box in which it lay, together with the
grave, full of the purest oil, but the body itself with the vestments
uncorrupted and smelling most sweetly[170].’
Here, too, we are told, was the tomb of one greater than Agnellus; but if
the statement of John Rouse, that Roger Bacon was buried among the
Franciscans at Oxford, is anything more than a tradition, it was perhaps
not in the church, but in the common burial place of the brethren of the
convent, that the Warwick antiquary found his grave[171].
The cloisters, of which we find no mention till the dissolution, were no
doubt situated on the south of the church, round ‘Penson’s Gardens.’
Whether the friars were buried in the cloisters, the garth, the
chapter-house, or ‘the cemetery of the Friars Minors,’ in which John
Dongan was interred in 1464[172] or sometimes in one place, sometimes in
another, is unknown. On the east of the cloisters would be the
chapter-house[173]; over it, and joining the church, a dormitory[174]. On
the south of the cloisters, opposite the church, stood the refectory. It
is possible, but not probable, that the long narrow building stretching
down towards Trill Mill Stream, which is marked in old maps of
Oxford[175], was the refectory: Bridge Street marks the site. The library
may have been on the west side of the cloisters, but no hint remains as to
the building or its position, while the contents may be more appropriately
treated elsewhere. The warden’s house is equally unknown; he may perhaps
merely have had rooms set apart in some one of the larger buildings[176],
as was probably the case with the vice-warden[177]. From the Lanercost
Chronicle we learn that in the thirteenth century the ‘master of the
schools’ had a chamber of his own[178]; and Wiclif tells us that in his
time
‘Capped Friars, that beene called Maisters of Diuinitie, haue there
chamber and service as Lords or Kings[179].’
Ample accommodation for guests was a marked feature in most religious
houses, and there is no reason to suppose that the Oxford Franciscan
Friary formed an exception to a custom which, while it excited some
animosity against the apostles of poverty, tended to ensure the favour and
secure the alms of the rich[180].
The convent was supplied with good water by a conduit of leaden pipes,
which, according to Wadding, was made in the thirteenth century by a
magnate at his own expense, and extended many miles under the watersheds
of the Isis and Cherwell[181]. In 1246-7 we hear that the Friars Preachers
and Minors had appropriated many places on the Thames, and had made there
‘ditches and walls and other things[182].’ Lastly, there were three gates:
one in Freren Street[183], perhaps an entrance to the church through
‘Church Place;’ another in St. Ebbe’s Street, opposite Beef Lane[184],
where St Ebbe’s Churchyard now extends; and a third--their principal
entrance, which existed in Wood’s time--in Littlegate Street, apparently
where the latter is now joined by Charles Street[185].
This completes the list of conventual as distinct from the farm buildings,
and if the account is meagre and unsatisfactory, we may try to console
ourselves with William of Nottingham’s retort, when a friar threatened to
accuse him before the Minister General ‘because the place at London was
not enclosed:’
‘And I will answer to the General, that I did not enter the Order to
build walls[186].’
CHAPTER III.
FRANCISCAN SCHOOLS AT OXFORD.
Learning necessary to the friars.--The first readers to the
Franciscans at Oxford.--Nature of the office of lector; Grostete and
Adam Marsh.--The lector and his _socius_.--Later lectors were ordinary
Regent Masters.--Appointment to the lectureship.--Special regulations
concerning the lectors.--System of instruction recommended by
Grostete.--Lectures by friars.--Controversy with the University about
theological degrees in 1253.--Controversy between the University and
Dominicans, and its results.--Study of philosophy (Arts) before
theology insisted on by the University.--Roger Bacon on the necessity
of a preliminary training for friars.--Extortion of graces by external
influence: ‘wax-doctors.’--Career of a student Minorite.--On the
numbers of friars sent to Oxford.--Course of study before
‘opposition.’--‘Opposition’ and ‘Responsion.’--The degree of
B.D.--Exercises before inception.--The degree of D.D.: the
licence.--Vesperies.--Inception.--Questions disputed on these
occasions in the thirteenth century.--How far the statutable
requirements as to the period of study were a reality.--Expenses at
inception.--Necessary Regency.--Conditions on which dispensations were
granted.--Maintenance of Franciscan students at the University.--What
proportion took degrees.--Relative numbers of the various religious
Orders at Oxford.
St. Francis himself was always strongly opposed to the learning of his
age.
‘Tantum habet homo de scientia quantum operatur,’ he said, ‘et
religiosus tantum est bonus orator quantum operatur[187].’
But it was inevitable that the missionaries to the towns should be armed
with a knowledge of theology to enable them to cope with the numerous
heresies of the thirteenth century, and with a knowledge of physical
science to enable them to cope with the frequent pestilences caused by the
disregard of sanitary conditions[188]. In addition to this the influence
of many learned men in the Order could not but be felt; and the early
Franciscans in England were as zealous for learning as for good works.
‘They were so fervent,’ Eccleston tells us, ‘in hearing the divine law
and in scholastic exercises, that they hesitated not to go every day
to the schools of theology, however distant, barefoot in bitter cold
and deep mud[189].’
Agnellus, though in Wood’s words ‘he never smelt of an Academy or tasted
of humane learning[190],’ frankly recognised the necessity. The school
which he built at Oxford has already been noticed:
‘but afterwards,’ adds Bartholomew of Pisa[191], ‘he had reason for
regret, when he saw the friars bestowing their time on frivolities and
neglecting needful things; for one day when he wished to see what
proficiency they were making, he entered the schools whilst a
disputation was going on, and hearing them wrangling and questioning,
_Utrum sit Deus_, he cried: “Woe is me, woe is me! Simple brothers
enter Heaven, and learned brothers dispute whether there is a God at
all!” Then he sent 10_l._ sterling to the Court to buy the Decretals,
that the friars might study them and give over frivolities.’
Agnellus rendered the greatest service to his Order by persuading Robert
Grostete, the foremost scholar of his time, and the most influential man
at Oxford, to accept the post of lecturer to the friars[192]. The exact
date at which he undertook these duties is uncertain. He resigned the
archdeaconries of Northampton and Leicester in 1231, but he may have been
lecturer to the Franciscans some time before this; certainly he was
closely connected with their house at Oxford[193]. He was resident in the
University in 1234[194], and according to both Eccleston[195] and the
Lanercost Chronicle[196], he gave up his lectureship only to accept the
bishopric of Lincoln in 1235.
He was succeeded by Master Peter[197], who afterwards became a bishop in
Scotland. The third reader was Master Roger Wesham[198], who afterwards
(namely in or before 1239) was made Dean of Lincoln, and then (1245)
Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. The fourth was Master Thomas Wallensis,
who,
‘after he had lectured laudably at the Friars’ in the same place, was
appointed (in 1247) to the bishopric of St. David’s in Wales[199].’
Thomas was made Archdeacon of Lincoln by Grostete in 1238, at which time
he was lecturing in Paris[200]; he was then young[201] and it is probable
that he was already archdeacon when he lectured to the friars at Oxford.
All these men were seculars, not friars: it was important at a time when,
as Roger Bacon says[202], ‘the Order of Minors was new and neglected by
the world,’ to secure the services of men of recognised position and
ability. Of Master Peter nothing further is known. The other two were
certainly close friends of Grostete[203]. Matthew Paris bears testimony to
the high character and learning, the kindness and tact, of Roger
Wesham[204]. Bacon ranks Thomas Wallensis among ‘the wise men of
old[205],’ who studied foreign languages and knew the value of philology;
and even Paris admits that this enemy of monks[206] was a man of lofty
purpose, and accepted the bishopric of St. David’s, though it was the
poorest see,
‘because it was in his native country, Wales, and he desired to
console his wretched fellow countrymen by his presence, advice, and
help[207].’
The divinity lecturer to the Franciscans or ‘Master of the Schools[208],’
as he was also called, had, as such, no status in the University. It is
even doubtful whether he counted as a ‘regent master,’ unless he also
lectured in the University Schools. Thus Adam Marsh protested against
being required by the Masters to subscribe a new statute on the ground
‘that he had three years ago retired from the office of teaching in
their University[209].’
But in a letter written shortly before this, and referring to the same
subjects, he mentions that he was ‘lecturing on Holy Scripture’ to the
friars[210]. The position of the _lector_ was, in fact, not unlike that of
a college tutor, except that he was always a man of proved ability and
long experience. To the friars he was far more than a theological
lecturer; he was a trusted friend, on whose advice and sympathy and help
they might reckon in all the conduct of life. Such at least was the
tradition established by Grostete and carried on by Adam Marsh[211]. Both
of them men versed in affairs of state, both men of acknowledged weight in
the counsels of the realm[212], and fearless opponents of illegality and
oppression, they not only trained the friars in theology and philosophy,
but taught them to comprehend the social needs of the age.
‘I return your lordship,’ writes Adam to Grostete[213], ‘the breviate
which you wrote, “_Of the rule of a kingdom and a tyranny_,” as you
sent it, sealed with the seal of the Earl of Leicester;’
and Simon de Montfort had frequent consultations with the friar about his
government of Gascony[214]. It was from their daily intercourse with men
like these that the Oxford Franciscans became, if not the leaders, the
spokesmen of the constitutional movement of the thirteenth century[215].
The corpse of Simon de Montfort was buried by the Grey Friars of Evesham,
and it is probably to the Franciscan school that the Latin poems in his
honour are to be ascribed[216], as well as the form of prayer addressed to
him:--
‘Sis pro nobis intercessor
Apud Deum, qui defensor
In terris extiteras[217].’
The Oxford Franciscans regarded him as a saint and a martyr, though he
died excommunicate, and testified to the miracles which he wrought[218].
The _lector_ had also his _socius_[219], a younger friar who acted as his
secretary, and whose time was almost entirely at his disposal. The
position of both _lector_ and _socius_ will be best illustrated by two
extracts from the letters of Adam Marsh.
In the first of these[220], addressed to the Provincial, he writes that he
has found Friar A. de Hereford, whom the Provincial had assigned to him as
his _socius_, affectionate and of good character, docile and well-read,
and far more capable than ‘some of those who are appointed by the counsel
of the discreet to instruct in Holy Scripture.’
‘I see,’ he continues, ‘that any friar who is associated with me to
help me in my various[221] and constant toil, will have to subordinate
his ecclesiastical labours and apply himself continually to supplying
my defects, and directing my goings, and supporting my burdens, though
this might sometimes produce in him virtue and industry and endurance.
Far be from me therefore such impious tyranny, as that I should be
willing to see the great gifts and spiritual progress in the said
friar stunted or retarded or thwarted by any consideration of private
convenience; especially as I can through the Saviour’s pity, be
provided, as I have heretofore been by your grace, with a competent
companion without injury to the general welfare. I have also reason to
think that Friar A., however great be his willingness and energy, will
be unable without bodily suffering and mental disquietude to continue
permanently with me, unless the stringent rules are relaxed in his
favour (_nisi quatenus urgentia mitigat obedientiae salutaris diurnos
aestus et vigilias nocturnas_).
‘... I ask therefore confidently, that you will, if it be not
displeasing to your holy paternity, send to me without delay Friar
Laurence de Sutthon, as my _socius_, if he consents, and that you will
send Friar A. to London to study, as he himself greatly desires, if it
be your good pleasure. And though Friar Laurence suffer some tolerable
defect, he is yet peculiarly fitted to help me, though vulgar
obstinacy may not think so.’
The other letter[222] is also directed to the Provincial.
‘I am not a little surprised,’ he writes, ‘that through some excessive
caution and severity, no provision has yet been made for the beloved
Friar W. de Maddele, who has up to now diligently borne the burden of
teaching (_eruditionis impendendae_), long since imposed on him. He is
thus compelled, not only to exhaust the vital spirit by excessive
studies, but also to wear out his bodily powers by writing every day
with his own hand, though his strength is not the strength of stone,
nor his flesh the flesh of brass. And while the other friars who have
been deputed to the office of lecturing, especially those to whom he
has succeeded, had great volumes and the assistance of _socii_
provided for them, he alone does not seem to be cared for; though I
hear that he has a pleasant faculty of lecturing, is acute in arguing,
and in writing and speaking useful and acceptable to both friars and
seculars. It will therefore be for you, if you please, without delay
to take thought for the peace of mind and provide for the advancement
(_provectui_) of those who study.’
The position of the _socius_ probably altered but little after this time.
That of the _lector_ underwent a change. The Franciscans assimilated their
system of teaching to the system in vogue in the University generally:
from the time of Adam Marsh the lecturers to the Franciscans were merely
ordinary Regent Masters in theology belonging to the Order. This will be
evident from a comparison of the dates at which the various lecturers,
whose names have been preserved, held the office: a sufficient number of
these dates has now been recovered, on the indisputable evidence of
contemporary records, to put the matter beyond all doubt[223].
The appointment to the lectureship was in the hands of the Provincial
Chapter[224]; practically the person recommended by the leading brethren
at Oxford was elected[225]. This is true of the later as well as of the
earlier lectors. No Minorite could proceed to any degree unless he were
first authorised to do so by papal ordinance or by the election of his
Order[226].
According to the Constitutions of Benedict XII, no Minorite might lecture
on the Sentences in a University (_i.e._ become B.D.),
‘unless he had first lectured on the four books of the Sentences with
the writings of the approved doctors in other _studia_ which are in
the same Order called _Generalia_,’
or in one of certain specified convents[227]. The friars of the English
province were specially favoured in respect to the degree of D.D. It was
decreed in the General Chapter at Rome in 1411
‘that no one shall be promoted to the degree of master, unless he
first go to Paris, according to the papal statutes and the general
institutes, and do all that he is bound to do, _Provincia Angliae
excepta_[228].’
However, the Franciscans at Oxford never obtained the right which was
enjoyed by the Dominicans at Paris, of being the sole judges of the
fitness of any friars of their own Order for academical degrees[229]. In
the case of Adam Marsh, the term of office was one year[230]; and this was
probably the general rule[231], though the readers might perhaps be
re-elected in the annual Provincial Chapter[232]. They often remained at
Oxford after the expiry of their year[233], and no doubt continued to
lecture, though they ceased to be _ex officio_ representatives of the
friars in their dealings with the University or other bodies.
Even in the earliest times it was found necessary to modify the stringency
of the rule in favour of the lecturers. Visiting and good works were
subordinated to their scholastic duties[234]. They were provided with more
ample accommodation than the other friars, and their privacy was at
certain times inviolable[235]. In the Constitutions of Benedict XII (1337)
regulations for their support are given with some detail[236]. Masters,
lectors, and bachelors in Universities were to be provided with the
necessaries of life by the convents of the places where they lectured. But
their other expenses, such as those connected with the necessary books,
were to be assessed by the General or Provincial Minister and to fall on
the convent from which they were sent; or, if the convent was unable to
‘procure’ the funds, these were to be supplied by the custody or province
in which the native convent of the lecturer was situated. In addition to
this, seculars and members of other religious Orders who attended the
lectures, would no doubt have to pay fees[237].
We may reasonably infer that Grostete practised in the Franciscan school
the system of instruction in theology which he subsequently recommended to
the University. When consulted by the latter, he answered that the Regent
Masters in theology ought to take the Old and New Testaments as the only
sure foundations of their teaching and make them the subject of all their
morning lectures, according to the custom of the Doctors of Paris[238].
Roger Bacon laments the exaggerated respect which was paid to the
‘Sentences’ in his day, and points out that
‘the learned men of old, some of whom we have seen, such as Robert
bishop of Lincoln and Friar Adam de Marisco, used only the text’ which
was ‘given to the world from the mouth of God and of the Saints[239].’
At the Friary, as in the rest of the University, much of the teaching in
the theological faculty was, even in the thirteenth century, done by
bachelors[240]; the admission to the degree of B.D. was accompanied by a
licence to ‘lecture on the book of the Sentences.’ Some of the lectures
would probably be for the brethren alone; others were open to the
University[241]. The latter would certainly be the case when a friar
delivered the lectures, which he was bound to give as ‘Necessary Regent,’
in his monastery. These courses seem however to have been sometimes
delivered in the University Schools in School Street[242].
The academic studies of the friars were confined to the faculty of
theology (in its wide mediaeval sense), and of canon law, the ‘handmaid’
of theology. The regulars were for the most part subject to the same
statutes as the secular students in these faculties, with some important
modifications.
The rules of the two Orders forbade their members to take a degree in
Arts[243]. The customs of the University, on the other hand, required
that the student of theology should have graduated in Arts[244]. The issue
was definitely raised in 1253[245], and we have from the pen of Adam Marsh
a detailed account of the struggle[246]. In February the Chancellor and
Masters of the University were formally petitioned to allow Friar Thomas
of York,
‘a man of high repute among the great and the many, on account of the
eminence of his character, ability, learning, and experience, to
ascend the chair of ordinary regent in Holy Scripture.’
The objection was then raised that he had not ruled in Arts. A committee
of seven was appointed by the Masters to prepare a report, and the
deliberations lasted, with a short interval, the whole of the next
fortnight (Feb. 22 to March 8). On Saturday, March 8, ‘the chancellor and
masters and some bachelors’ assembled to consider the report, which was to
the effect that Friar Thomas should incept this time, but that a statute
should be passed providing that for the future no one should incept in
theology unless he had previously ruled in Arts in some University, and
read one book of the Canon (of the Bible) or of the Sentences, and
publicly preached in the University; the Chancellor and Masters reserved
to themselves the right of granting dispensations, but provided against
the use of undue influence of powerful patrons in procuring such ‘graces’
by the clause:
‘but if any one shall attempt to extort a grace from the University
through the influence of any magnate, he shall _ipso facto_ be
expelled from the society of the Masters and deprived of the
privileges of the University[247].’
The report was at once accepted as the basis of a statute, to be signed by
‘the Chancellor and all the regent masters in theology, and Friar Hugh
of Mistretune, and the other regent masters in decrees and laws, and
the two rectors (proctors) for the artists, and Friar Adam called de
Marisco[248].’
Adam however refused to sign, and the meeting was prorogued till the next
day, the first Sunday in Lent, only to be postponed again till Monday,
when Adam, ‘in the presence of the chancellor, masters, and scholars,’
repeated his objections, adding others. He could not, he argued, agree to
a statute of which he disapproved, merely to gain his immediate point. The
promised ‘graces’ were fallacious,
‘since by the opposition of any one man such a grace could be long
delayed or altogether prevented; thus even the best men would be
rejected, and he who was approved by divinity would be reproved by
inhumanity.’
Further, it was unreasonable to require his signature, seeing that he was
now almost a stranger (_quasi foras factus_), having for three years
retired from the office of lecturing in their University. At length he
formally washed his hands of the whole matter, withdrawing even his
opposition,
‘since the measure, dangerous as it was and distasteful to him, did
not seem to him to be conceived in a spirit of wilful injustice,’
(_non videtur secundum planum sui praeferre iniquitatem_).
He then left the assembly, while the seven commissioners withdrew to
decide on the terms of the statute, which was merely a recapitulation of
the original report. The Chancellor at once sent Adam the final decision,
‘written with his own hand,’ which the latter duly forwarded to the
Provincial Minister. He left Oxford on Wednesday, the very day on which
the statute was passed, while Thomas of York celebrated his ‘vesperies’ on
Thursday and his inception on Friday, under the presidency of Friar Peter
de Manners. In view of the bitterness which marked both the contemporary
struggle between the University and Mendicants at Paris, and the disputes
between the University and Dominicans at Oxford sixty years later, it is
impossible not to be struck with the good feeling and moderation displayed
both by Adam and his opponents.
The controversy at the beginning of the fourteenth century was to a large
extent the sequel to the events we have just related[249]. The Dominicans
in 1311 appealed first to the King, and when this proved of no avail, to
the Pope, complaining that graces were frequently refused to fit
candidates, and demanding the repeal of the statute of 1253. The appeal
was read in the church of the Minorites,
‘in the presence of a vast multitude of people there assembled on the
occasion of a public sermon to the clerks,’
but the Franciscans took no active part in the matter, and the details of
the struggle belong to the history of the Black Friars. The other
Mendicant Orders however were no doubt involved in the odium which
attached to the conduct of the Dominicans, and from this time forth the
jealous feeling between the friars and the University never died out.
The issue of the controversy concerned the Franciscans no less than the
Preaching Friars. In 1314 the arbitrators to whom the matter had been
submitted published their award[250]. The statute of 1253 was upheld, but
the right of refusing to any one, who had not ruled in Arts, the grace to
incept in theology, was practically withdrawn from each individual member
of Congregation and vested in the Regent Masters of the Theological
Faculty.
‘On such a grace being asked, every Master shall be bound to swear on
the gospels ... that he will not refuse such grace out of malice,
hatred or rancour, but only for the common utility and honour of the
university. And if notwithstanding this oath such grace be refused by
any one, the reason of the refusal shall at once be set forth in the
same Congregation of Masters in the presence of the Chancellor and
proctors of the university and the Masters ruling in Theology, and
within ten days or less it shall be discussed for the decision of the
university whether that reason be sufficient or not. And if the reason
of the aforesaid refusal be sufficient in the judgment of the Masters
then ruling in Theology or of the majority of them, the refusal of the
grace shall hold good; but if the reason of the refusal be
insufficient in the judgment of the same persons, _eo ipso_ the grace
shall be granted[251].’
The Dominicans however hoped with the Pope’s assistance[252] to get more
favourable terms, and it was not till 1320 that they finally submitted to
the University[253]. The wording of the award was certainly vague and
required explanation. What, for instance, was the meaning of the
expression, ‘the common utility and honour of the university’? It is
probably to this period that the following decree is to be referred, and
it may be regarded as a gloss on the award of 1314[254]:--
‘_Item_, quod nullus de cetero, nisi prius in artibus rexerit, in
disputatione solemni alicujus doctoris in theologia, publice opponere
permittatur, nisi prius coram Cancellario et Procuratoribus
Universitatis juramentum praestiterit corporale, quod philosophiam per
octo annos, solis philosophicis principaliter intendendo, et postea
theologiam per sex annos completos ad minus audierit, seu partim
audierit et partim legerit, per spatium temporis supradicti: ad
fidelem vero hujus statuti conservationem, noverint doctores in
theologia Regentes se fore specialiter obligatos.’
The award of 1314 remained the permanent law of the University, and for
the next century the friars confined themselves to insisting on the due
execution of its provisions. In 1388, Richard II, hearing that,
‘contrary to the decision of the aforesaid declaration you maliciously
prevent the friars from taking degrees in theology,’
wrote two strongly worded letters to the Chancellor, Proctors, and Regent
Masters of the University, ordering them, ‘under pain of our heavy
displeasure,’ to observe the statute of 1314[255]. In 1421, in
consideration of remonstrances from the King and the Archbishop of
Canterbury, the University gave a solemn undertaking to carry out the same
statute, with some changes in detail[256]. So long however as the
condition, that the candidate must have ruled in Arts, was inserted in the
‘form of licensing to incept in theology[257],’ the religious felt
themselves to be at a disadvantage in comparison with the seculars, and
bitterly resented their inferiority. When therefore, in 1447, the
University was raising funds for the erection of the new schools, the
Mendicants seized the opportunity to secure the abolition of this clause,
promising in return that each friar should pay 40_s._ to the University at
the time of receiving the licence[258]. This may however have been only a
temporary arrangement: the Registers of Congregation supply little
evidence as to its having been carried out[259].
The object of these statutes was partly to prevent the regulars from
having an undue advantage over the seculars in the matter of theological
degrees, but they must have had the effect of ensuring to the friars some
preliminary training before the commencement of their theological
studies. Roger Bacon, as usual, has a decided opinion on the necessity of
such a training. Writing in 1271[260], he says:--
‘During the last forty years there have arisen some in the
Universities (_in studio_) who have made themselves doctors and
masters of theology and philosophy, though they have never learnt
anything of real value (_dignum_) and are neither willing nor able to
do so on account of their ‘_status_.’... They are boys inexperienced
in themselves, in the world, in the learned languages, Greek and
Hebrew; ... they are ignorant of all parts and sciences of mundane
philosophy, when they venture on the study of theology, which demands
all human wisdom.... They are the boys of the two student Orders, like
Albert and Thomas and others, who enter the Orders when they are
twenty years old or less.... Many thousands enter who cannot read the
Psalter or Donatus, and immediately after making their profession,
they are set to study theology.... And so it was right that they
should make no progress, especially when they did not procure
instruction for themselves in philosophy from others after they
entered the Order. And most of all because they have presumed in the
Orders to investigate philosophy by themselves without a teacher--so
that they have become masters in theology and philosophy before they
were disciples--therefore infinite error reigns among them.’
The Oxford friars however could not have acquired their great scholastic
reputation unless they had been better fitted than the seculars for the
study of theology; and Friar William Woodford had little difficulty in
pointing to many who, having entered the Order in their youth,
‘wrote many works of great wisdom, which remain for the advantage of
the Church[261].’
The clause of the statute of 1253 which prohibited the extortion of graces
or dispensations by means of the letters of influential persons was not
altogether effective. When, in 1358, the bitter feeling against the friars
found a spokesman in Richard Fitzralph and again burst forth into open
hostility, the clause was re-enacted in a more stringent form[262]. Any
one using such letters was declared for ever incapable of holding or
obtaining any degree at Oxford, and the University determined to hold up
these ‘wax-doctors’ to obloquy.
‘These,’ begins a proclamation of the same year[263], ‘are the names
of the wax-doctors, as they are called who seek to extort graces from
the University by means of letters of lords sealed with wax, or
because they run from hard study as wax runs from the face of fire. Be
it known that such wax-doctors are always of the Mendicant Orders, the
cause whereof we have found[264]; for by apples and drink, as the
people fables, they draw boys to their religion, and do not instruct
them after their profession, as their age demands, but let them wander
about begging, and waste the time when they could learn, in currying
favour with lords and ladies.... These are their names: Friar Richard
Lymynster incepted in theology by means of the prince’s letters, and
his grace contained the condition that he should incept and not
lecture, but that Friar John Nutone his predecessor should continue
lecturing[265]: and Friar Giuliortus de Limosano of the Order of
Minors, who asserted that he was secretary of the King of Sicily,
extorted from the University, or rather from the theological faculty,
by letters of the King, grace to oppose.’
These instances hardly seem to justify the violent language of the
proclamation, and it is uncertain to what extent the Oxford Minorites were
guilty of the practice here denounced. Wiclif repeats the charge against
the Mendicants generally:--
‘A what cursedness is this, to a dead man, as to the world, and pride
and vanitie thereof, to get him a cap of masterdom by praier of
Lords[266]!’
It remains for us to give an account of the academic, or rather scholastic
career of a Friar Minor at Oxford. As many of the friars entered the Order
in tender years, there is no doubt that boys’ schools formed part of many
of the friaries[267]. There is no evidence of such a school at Oxford, but
at Paris one existed where the student friars received a preliminary
education[268]. It is probable that the names of friars who showed ability
were sent up by the various convents to the Provincial Chapter and that a
certain number were elected by the ‘discreet men’ there assembled to go to
the University[269]. There is no evidence of any definite rule fixing the
number or proportion of friars who might be sent from each convent,
custody, or province, to Oxford[270]. The average number of friars living
in the convent at Oxford at any time during the last quarter of the
thirteenth and the first half of the fourteenth century was probably
between seventy and eighty[271].
A friar usually completed his eight years’ study of Arts, and often began
his course of theology[272], at his native convent. On coming up to Oxford
he at once entered on or continued his theological studies. A secular
student of Divinity during his first three years attended ‘cursory’
lectures on the Bible and was admitted to oppose after the end of the
fourth year[273]. In the friaries the course of study would in the main
correspond with that adopted by the University. After six years[274]
(instead of four) spent chiefly in the study of the Bible, a friar was
presented by his teacher, a Regent Master of the same Order[275], to the
Chancellor and Proctors; special enquiry was then made as to his knowledge
of the liberal arts, his age, morals, and stature; and if he satisfied the
University officers on these points, he was admitted to ‘oppose in
theology[276].’ Two more years elapsed before he could become a
‘respondent[277].’ Opposition or opponency and responsion were the two
sides of a disputation: some question in theology was proposed, probably
by the Master of the Schools; the opponent took one side (affirmative or
negative) and _put_ his case; the respondent then had to take the other
side. The difficulty of the respondent’s task was probably augmented by
his having to answer the arguments of more than one opponent[278]. These
regulations however were apparently superseded in 1358, when it was
enacted that no religious who had not ruled in Arts should presume to read
the Sentences until he had opposed duly and publicly a whole year in the
ordinary disputations of the Masters, no other person of the same Order
opposing at the same time[279]. This appears to have been the theory, and
to some extent the practice, during the times about which we have any
detailed information--i.e. the period covered by the early Registers. In
none of the supplications and graces of the Minorites is there mention of
the lapse of two years or anything approaching it between opponency and
responsion; the latter exercise indeed is usually coupled with opponency,
and treated as a very secondary affair[280]. A few instances will be
sufficient as illustrations. In 1515 a grace was granted to Friar W.
German, scholar of theology, with the stipulation that half a year should
elapse between his opposition and responsion; the condition was
subsequently withdrawn at German’s request[281]. In 1457, Friar Gonsalvo
of Portugal supplicated that he might count two terms of opponency as a
year[282]; Richard Ednam in 1455 was allowed to count eight oppositions
_pro completa forma oppositionis_[283]. Friar John Smith was admitted B.D.
six months after he was admitted to oppose[284]. The opponent had to
dispute in each of the Schools of the Masters in theology[285]; towards
the end of our period, oppositions were held in the new Schools of
theology[286].
After nine years spent in theological study, the friar might be admitted
to read the _Sentences_ of Peter Lombard publicly in the Schools[287],
that is, to take the degree of B.D. On the presentation of the candidate
to the Chancellor and Proctors, one at least of the Regents in theology
must swear that he _knew_ him to be a fit person in morals and learning,
the other Regents, that they _believed_ him to be such[288]. Within a year
from this time[289], the new Bachelor had to begin his lectures on the
_Sentences_, which he continued for a year (three terms), reading the text
on most of the ‘legible’ days of each term, with questions or arguments
pertinent to the matter, giving the accepted interpretation. He was not to
raise doubtful points or attack the conclusions of another, more than once
a term, except at the first and last lectures on each book of the
_Sentences_[290]. In the first year also, he had to preach an examinatory
sermon, which before 1303 was usually held at the Black or Grey Friars,
after that date at St. Mary’s[291]; another Latin sermon, ‘_qui non sit
examinatorius_’ at St. Mary’s[292]; and a third, before his inception, in
the Dominican church, according to the statute of 1314[293]. In the next
two years he had to continue his studies, and perhaps lecture on a book of
the canon of the Bible[294]: the lecturing in this case was apparently to
be done _biblice_; i.e. without commenting or discussing questions, except
only on the text (_quaestiones ... literales_)[295]. Further, after the
lapse of a year from the conclusion of his lectures on the Sentences, he
had to respond to eight Regents in theology separately (or to all if there
were less than eight); all or most of these responsions were to be
‘ordinary,’ or at least ‘concursive’ (_concursivae_), and responsions at
vesperies and inceptions were included in the eight[296]. Whether the rest
of these responsions took place at the terminal disputations in the
Theology School is not quite clear; but a later statute (1583) provides
that none of these terminal disputations shall count to any one ‘_pro
forma_[297].’ The responsions were latterly held in the new schools:
before these were built, in the schools of the various Masters. The
Bachelor had then completed the studies necessary for the degree of S.T.P.
or D.D.
These exercises seem usually to have been insisted on, more or less fully,
even in the century before the Reformation. Friar John Sunday in 1454,
having finished his lectures on the Sentences, supplicated for leave to
incept after responding to each of the doctors and completing his course
on the Bible: the grace was conceded on condition that he should respond
and oppose eight times ‘_pro forma_,’ and respond twice ‘_preter
formam_[298].’ Friar Thomas Anyden, S.T.B., supplicated (1507) that three
responsions in the new schools with an examinatory sermon and
‘_introitus_’ of the Bible should suffice that he should be admitted to
incept[299]. It was rarely that three years intervened before the
admission to read the Sentences and inception[300]. Thus Friar Gilbert
Saunders was admitted to oppose in Nov. 1511, and incepted in July
1513[301]. Friar John Smyth was admitted B.D. in Dec. 1512, and D.D. in
July 1513[302]. Another of the same name however was allowed to incept in
1507 if he had spent four years in the study of theology after taking the
bachelor’s degree[303].
We now come to the exercises and ceremonies connected with inception.
First the grace had to be asked of Congregation; there was no fixed time
for doing this[304]. Secondly came the ‘deponing,’ which was done by all
the regent masters in the faculty present; all of them had to swear that
they _knew_ the candidate to be a fit person; he must be of good life and
honest conversation and not deformed in body (_corpore vitiati_)[305]. He
then received in the ordinary form the Chancellor’s licence to incept,
after swearing to observe the statutes of the University and to incept
within a year of his admission[306].
On the day preceding the day fixed for his ‘vesperies,’ the licentiate
sent to each Master of Theology and requested him to attend the latter
ceremony[307]. Theological vesperies were in the thirteenth century held
in the various schools; a Franciscan celebrated his vesperies in the
school or church of the convent under the presidency of his own
master[308]. At the beginning of the fourteenth century, a statute was
passed enacting that every inceptor in theology should celebrate his
vesperies in St. Mary’s Church[309]. It does not seem that the masters in
the faculty were bound to attend[310], but the prospect of an important or
exciting discussion often attracted a large audience[311]. The exercises
at vesperies consisted of disputations on theological questions proposed
probably by the candidate[312], and announced to Congregation. All the
masters present both at vesperies and at the Act had the right to bring
forward their arguments in turn[313]. Thus Friar Hugh of Hertepol (c.
1280-1290) disputed ‘in the vesperies before the inception of Friar John
de Persole at Oxford[314].’ About the same time ‘Sneyt (debated) a
question in the vesperies of Robert de Bromyard; Thomas of Malmesbury,
preacher, responded[315].’ The proceedings were terminated by a speech
delivered by the presiding master in praise of the inceptor[316]. Grostete
is said to have presided and given the oration at the vesperies of Adam
Marsh[317].
Inception followed the next day. Even this ceremony in the thirteenth
century took place sometimes in the churches of the friars[318]; but at
the beginning of the fourteenth century, it was certainly the custom to
hold the Act in St. Mary’s[319]. The inceptor was admitted into the gild
of Masters by one of the Masters (not the Chancellor), who was called the
Father[320]. In the case of a Franciscan, the Father would usually, though
not always, be a doctor of the same Order[321]. Those about to incept
first read their lectures, then opened a discussion on certain
questions[322]. In later times the exercises consisted of the discussion
by all the inceptors, as opponents, of three questions proposed by the
respondent and sanctioned by Congregation; the respondent, while
statutably a D.D., was usually some M.A. or B.D. who was allowed to count
this responsion _pro forma_[323]. In the more vigorous days of
scholasticism, it is probable that the disputation was more of a
reality--that the inceptor (who took the part of opponent) chose his own
subjects[324] and was answered by a rival among the doctors[325].
Many of the questions discussed at vesperies, inceptions, and other
disputations at Oxford at the end of the thirteenth century--probably in
the convent of the Minorites--are preserved in a manuscript at
Assisi[326]. The question on which Friar Hugh of Hertepol disputed at the
vesperies of Friar John de Persole was: _An Christus in primo instanti
potuit mereri perfectione_. Other questions of the same Friar Hugh were:
_An deus eadem ratione formali videatur trinus et unus_, _An incarnacio
sit possibilis_. The following are also among the questions in the same
volume: _Utrum deus sit infinite potencie_, _Utrum virgo concepit sine
semine_, _An intellectus sit forma corporis_, _An deus sit in omnibus
rebus_, _An omnes beati equaliter participant beatitudine_, _An ratio
ymaginis est in actuali visione dei_.
We may next enquire how far the statutable requirements as to the period
of study were carried out: the only evidence obtainable is from the
registers, which begin about 1450. The statutes, as we have seen, required
that a religious should have studied Arts (i.e. philosophy) and Theology
for fourteen years before opponency. The periods mentioned in the
supplications vary from sixteen to eight years, the most usual number of
years being twelve. Before inception, six more years of study were
demanded, i.e. twenty in all. The period in the supplications varies from
fourteen to twenty years; the usual number is eighteen. There is however
reason to believe that these figures are not very exact. We have no means
of checking them with regard to opponency, and the University was probably
in the same position. But it frequently happened, that a friar, who had
been admitted to oppose on the ground of having studied ‘logic, philosophy
and theology’ for twelve years, supplicated two years later or less for
grace to incept on the plea that he had studied the same subjects for
eighteen years[327].
The expenses at inception were very heavy. The _religiosi_ wore their
usual habit[328], and Mendicants were exempted from the payment of
‘commons’ to the University[329]. Further, when several inmates of the
same convent incepted on the same day, the charges (fees to the bedells
and others?) were the same as for one inceptor[330]. But these details did
not touch the largest expenses. According to ancient custom, every
inceptor on the day of his inception feasted the Regent Masters
(apparently of all faculties)[331], and Wiclif inveighs against the
Mendicant Doctors for their
‘great gifts and making of huge feasts of a hundred and many hundred
pounds[332].’
Friar William Woodford, Wiclif’s contemporary, started from London to take
his D.D. with £40 in his purse[333].
Attempts were made to curtail the expenses of the friars. In his
constitutions for the reformation of the Franciscan Order in 1336, Pope
Benedict XII decreed[334], that
‘at inceptions[335] of Masters of the Order in theology, or of
bachelors beginning the Sentences, they shall not spend in food and
drink, except once only, more than would suffice for the moderate
refection of the convent of the place where such inceptions take
place. Other bachelors, lecturers or other students, both at Paris and
at other _studia generalia_ and _studia particularia_, shall not spend
anything at their own inception or scholastic act or at the inception
or act of others.’
It became usual, both among religious and seculars, to commute the
expenses of the feast for a fixed money payment to the University.
According to the scale fixed by statute in 1478[336], seculars who were
able to spend at the University more than £40 and less than £100 (a year),
paid twenty marks in lieu of the feast; those able to spend £100 or more,
paid £20. A monk’s composition was assessed at twenty marks; a friar’s at
ten marks or £6 13_s._ 4_d._ (equivalent to about £80 of present money).
The sums actually paid by the Franciscans varied considerably. Sometimes
the statutable amount was paid[337]. Friar John Whytwell (1449/50) paid
£10[338]. Friar Richard Ednam (1463) was required to give £15, as well as
a _liberata_ to the Regents _ex sumptu proprio_[339]. More often
(especially in the sixteenth century) a reduction of the sum was granted
by the University, the concession being usually accompanied by the
condition that the friar should say masses _pro bono statu
Regentium_[340]. Friar Thomas Anneday was allowed to pay seven marks,
‘because he is poor and has few friends[341].’ Others obtained a reduction
of their composition by one half[342]; or the whole sum might be remitted
under certain conditions, as in the case of Friar Nicholas de Burgo[343].
Sometimes Congregation refused to allow the full reduction asked for[344].
It was further customary for inceptors to provide robes for masters and
others attending their inception. Perhaps a trace of this custom may be
seen in the grace to Friar Gonsalvo of Portugal, who at his inception was
to
‘give a livery, i.e. _cultellos_, according to the ancient practice,
to all the Regents[345].’
During the period of necessary regency, which followed inception, a
secular had the right to attend all meetings of Congregation, and was
bound to deliver ‘ordinary’ lectures publicly in the schools for the
remainder of the year in which he incepted and the whole of the following
year[346]. A statute of 1478 states the custom as enforced in the case of
the Mendicants[347]:--
‘Every one of them so incepting shall be bound to necessary regency
for twenty-four months to be reckoned continuously from the day of his
inception, including vacations, or he shall be regent and pay to the
University according to the ancient customs; and although it happen
that some other of the same Order incept within the term of the said
months, he shall yet be bound to observe the foresaid form of regency,
so that however only one of them come to the house of Congregation,
according to the custom hitherto in use; proviso, that none of them
shall omit to lecture (_expendet_) more than thirty days in a year by
virtue of any grace whether general or special.’
Perhaps the exclusion of the friars, except one of each Order, from the
house of Congregation and consequently from the government of the
University, dates from the middle of the fourteenth century[348]. In 1454
Friar John David, S.T.P., supplicated for leave
‘to resume his ordinary lectures and exercise the acts of regent
excepting the entry to the house of Congregation[349].’
Dispensations from necessary regency were often obtained. In 1452 Friar
Anthony de Vallibus, D.D., asked leave to absent himself from all
scholastic acts for a fortnight in order to visit his friends who were
sick[350]. Friar William Walle was dispensed from fifteen days of his
regency in 1518[351]; Friar John Brown from his regency during Lent in
1514[352]. Gilbert Sander and Walter Goodfeld were released from the whole
of their necessary regency[353]. John Smyth obtained a similar grace as
being ‘warden of a convent and consequently very busy[354].’ Dispensations
from the sermon which was to be preached in St. Mary’s within a year of
inception were also very frequent[355].
These and other graces were usually granted subject to certain
conditions. The recipient was often to say masses ‘for the pestilence’ or
‘for the welfare of the Regents’[356]: or he had to lecture gratuitously
on some specified book[357] or preach a sermon[358]; or again the payment
of a sum of money was imposed as a condition[359]. Thus in 1515 Friar John
Flavyngur was allowed to give extraordinary lectures on a book of the
Decretals,
‘on condition that he would pay 6_s._ 8_d._ to the University on the
day of his admission and would read two books of the Decretals[360].’
Friar Thomas Frances received permission in 1521 to incept
‘on condition that he would pay 40_d._ within a month for the repair
of the staff of the junior bedell of arts and would preach a sermon at
St. Paul’s within two years and an examinatory sermon before his
degree[361].’
Franciscan students were maintained at the Universities by a system of
exhibitions. These were provided sometimes by private benefactors[362],
usually by the native convent of the student out of the ‘common alms,’
with the occasional assistance of other convents[363]. From the few traces
which remain of the custom we may infer that the exhibition was generally
reckoned at £5 a year, and that this sum covered the ordinary expenses of
living[364]. Masters, lecturers and bachelors, as already stated, were
supported by the convent in which they lectured[365]: but their allowance
was probably not much larger than that of the ordinary student friars.
Nicholas Hereford, preaching at Oxford in 1382[366], asserted that those
of the Mendicants who had graduated as masters or bachelors, in addition
to the ample allowance which they got from their community, begged for
themselves, saying, ‘I am a bachelor (or master) and require more than
others, because I ought to be able to live up to my position.’ (_Quia
oportet me habere ad expendendum secundum statum meum._)
It is impossible to say what proportion of the Franciscans at Oxford
proceeded to a degree. In 1300 we have the names of twenty-two members of
the convent: of these, ten at least were then, or became afterwards,
Doctors of Divinity[367]. But the proportion of graduates to non-graduates
and B.D.’s in the whole convent cannot have been nearly so large. The
following statistics are derived from the University Registers[368]. From
1449 to 1463, five Franciscans obtained or supplicated for the doctor’s
degree; five others for that of bachelor only. From 1505 to 1538 (i.e.
about thirty-three years, as some pages of the Registers are missing),
twenty-five Franciscans incepted or supplicated for the degree of D.D.;
twenty-six others obtained or supplicated for that of B.D. (one of them
also for B.Can.L.): three more were admitted to oppose: one more
supplicated for B.Can.L. The proportion of D.D.’s to B.D.’s would
generally be larger than this: from 1532 to the dissolution in 1538
fourteen obtained, or supplicated for, the degree of bachelor, two only
became D.D.’s: we may reasonably suppose that some of the fifteen
bachelors would have proceeded to the doctor’s degree had not the
dissolution intervened.
The following figures will show the relative numbers of the various
religious houses in Oxford[369]. The Registers from 1449 to 1463 contain
the names of 10 Franciscans, 13 Dominicans, 12 Carmelites, 9 Austin
Friars, 44 Benedictines, and 8 Cistercians: from 1505 to 1538, of 57
Franciscans, 40[370] Dominicans, 24 Carmelites, 23 Austins, 169
Benedictines, and 44 Cistercians.
CHAPTER IV.
BOOKS AND LIBRARIES.
Absence of privacy.--Books of individual friars.--The two libraries,
and their contents.--Grostete’s bequest.--Extant manuscripts once in
the Franciscan Convent.--Alleged illegal detention of books by the
friars in 1330.--Richard Fitzralph’s statements.--Richard of Bury on
friars’ libraries.--Dispersion of the books.--Leland’s description of
the library in his time.
It is difficult to realise the external conditions under which the friars
produced their works. At the end of the thirteenth and in the early part
of the fourteenth century--the period of their greatest literary
activity--privacy must have been almost unknown. Only ministers and
lectors at the Universities were allowed to have a separate chamber or
compartment shut off from the dormitory[371]. But there can be little
doubt that, from Wiclif’s time onwards[372], each Doctor of Divinity had
his chamber; and every student had some place allotted to him, in which
stood a _studium_, or combined desk and book-case[373]. Every student
friar had books set apart for his especial use[374]; these books were
obtained by gift or bequest[375], by purchase[376] or by assignation by
the Provincial[377] or Warden[378], or they had been copied out by the
friar himself[379]. Alexander IV expressly declared that they were not the
private property of the individual friars[380]; on the death of the friar
who had had the use of them, they reverted to the convent, or were
distributed to others ‘by the Warden with the consent of the convent and
licence of the minister[381].’
There is no reason to suppose that the friars had a chamber specially set
apart as a _scriptorium_; they were comparatively free from the legal
routine or ‘office-work’ which the administration of their vast estates
imposed on the monks and their clerks. But the transcription of
manuscripts was part of the regular work of the Oxford Franciscans; and it
is indeed the only kind of manual labour expressly mentioned in connexion
with the convent. Roger Bacon’s statement[382] that he could only get a
fair copy of his works made for the Pope by writers unconnected with his
Order, means merely that there were no professional scribes among the
Minorites of Paris. The vellum which Adam Marsh asked the Custodian of
Cambridge to send at his earliest convenience[383], may have been intended
for original compositions of the friars, but it was probably to be used
for a careful fair copy of some work--perhaps a Missal or a book of the
Bible. Several manuscripts, containing the works of Nicholas Gorham, are
still extant, which Friar William of Nottingham copied at Oxford with
‘tedious solicitude’ and ‘laborious diligence,’ at the expense of his
brother, Sir Hugh of Nottingham[384].
It was naturally in the libraries that most of the literary treasures were
stored. In the fifteenth century there were two libraries in the
Franciscan convent at Oxford, the library of the convent and the library
of the student friars[385]. There is no evidence that either was founded
by Grostete[386]. The convent probably received its first considerable
collection of books from Adam Marsh, to whom his uncle, Richard Marsh,
Bishop of Durham, bequeathed his library in 1226[387]. The next book we
hear of at the Grey Friars is the volume of Decretals purchased by
Agnellus[388]--doubtless the _Decretum_ of Gratian with the additions
codified by Raymund of Pennaforte and approved by Gregory IX in 1230. In
1253, Grostete,
‘because of his love for Friar Adam Marsh, left in his will all his
books to the convent of Friars Minors at Oxford[389].’
From a rather obscure passage in one of Adam’s letters[390], this would
appear to mean all Grostete’s writings ‘both original and translated,’ not
all the books which he possessed: on the other hand, a copy of St.
Augustine’s _De Civitate Dei_ is extant which the friars received from
Grostete[391]. These works of _Lincolniensis_ were in the library in the
middle of the fifteenth century, when Dr. Thomas Gascoigne was allowed to
consult them[392]. He mentions particularly having seen a complete copy
of Grostete’s letters[393], his autograph gloss or exposition on the
Epistles of St. Paul[394], two copies (one of them autograph) of his
commentary on the Psalter[395], a treatise against luxury[396], and
another _super textum_[397], both written by his own hand. Boston of Bury
notices his translation of the _Testamenta XII Patriarcharum_ in the same
place. Friar Thomas Netter of Walden refers to a book _De Studio_ by
Grostete, with autograph notes by the author, which he had seen in the
Minorite convent[398]; and Wadding mentions two more treatises, or rather
sermons, which Grostete gave to the friars--one _De Laude Paupertatis_,
the other _De Scala Paupertatis_[399]. Probably all these were in the
library of the convent[400]. Another relic of Grostete preserved there was
his ‘episcopal sandals made of rushes[401].’
The statement that all Roger Bacon’s works were in these libraries rests
on the authority of John Twyne[402], but it is not probable that his
writings were ever collected in one place. No doubt the works of the
scholastic philosophers, and chiefly of the Franciscan schoolmen[403],
formed the bulk of the library; which also contained a bibliographical
compilation of considerable value, namely the _Catalogus illustrium
Franciscanorum_, of which Leland often makes use[404]. St. Jerome’s
‘Catalogue of Illustrious Men,’ was there bound up with ‘many other good
books[405],’ his commentaries on Isaiah and Ezechiel[406], a book called
_Speculum Laicorum_[407], and a few Hebrew and even Greek
manuscripts[408].
Few only of the MSS. seem to have been preserved; very few at any rate can
be identified[409]. Caius College possesses two of them, a copy of the
Gospels in Greek and a Psalter in Greek[410]. The volume (already referred
to) containing St. Augustine’s _De Civitate Dei_, with Grostete’s
annotations, is now in the Bodleian[411]. A thirteenth-century MS. of some
of Grostete’s lesser works, with St. Augustine’s _De Concordia quatuor
Evangeliorum_, given to Lincoln College by Gascoigne, was perhaps obtained
by him from the Franciscan library[412]. The copy of Jerome’s ‘Catalogue
of Illustrious Men,’ which Gascoigne saw in this library, appears to be
extant among the MSS. in Lambeth Palace[413]. It may be reasonably
conjectured that the single copy of Adam Marsh’s letters[414], and some or
all of the treatises bound up in Phillipps MS. 3119[415], were also kept,
or at any rate written, in the Oxford convent. The following interesting
notes occur in a Digby manuscript in the Bodleian[416]:--
‘For the information of those wishing to know the principles of the
musical art, this book, which is called _Quatuor principalia Musice_,
was given by Friar John of Tewkesbury to the Community of the Friars
Minors at Oxford, with the authority and assent of Friar Thomas of
Kyngusbury, Master, Minister of England, namely A. D. 1388. So that it
may not be alienated by the aforesaid community of friars, under pain
of sacrilege.’... (At the end), ‘This work was first finished on the
4th of August, 1351. In that year the Regent among the Minors at
Oxford was Friar Symon of Tunstede, D.S.T., who excelled in music and
in the seven liberal arts. Here ends the treatise called _Quatuor
principalia_, which was put forth by a Friar Minor of the custody of
Bristol, who did not insert his name here because some thought scorn
of him’ (_propter aliquorum dedignacionem_).
Sometimes, if we may believe their accusers, the Friars obtained books by
less creditable means than gift, bequest, or purchase. In 1330[417] the
Sheriff of Oxfordshire received a writ from the King instructing him
‘to command the Warden of the Friars Minors at Oxford and friar Walter
de Chatton to give back to John de Penreth, clerk, justly and without
delay, two books of the value of forty shillings, which they are
unjustly keeping, as he says’;
failing this the said friars shall be summoned to appear before the King’s
justices at Westminster. The Sheriff forwarded this writ to the Mayor, but
the latter declared that the friars were not subject to his jurisdiction,
‘and therefore nothing was done in the matter[418].’
The friars had on all sides the reputation of being great collectors of
books. Richard Fitzralph, the famous Archbishop of Armagh, was fond of
exaggeration[419], and no one will accept without considerable
modifications his statement, made before the Pope in 1257[420], that the
friars have grown so numerous and wealthy,
‘that in the faculties of Arts, Theology, Canon Law, and as many
assert, Medicine and Civil Law, scarcely a useful book is to be found
in the market, but all are bought up by the friars, so that in every
convent is a great and noble library, and every one of them who has a
recognised position in the Universities (and such are now innumerable)
has also a noble library.’
Some rectors of churches, whom the Archbishop had sent to the
Universities, had even been obliged to return home owing to the
impossibility of getting Bibles and other theological books. Perhaps these
rectors were not filled with a passionate desire to learn. In 1373 the
University passed a statute against the excessive number of unauthorized
booksellers in Oxford[421].
Richard of Bury mentions the great help he received from Dominicans and
Franciscans in collecting his books[422], and bears testimony to the
magnificence of the libraries of the Mendicants which he visited:
‘there we found heaped up amid the utmost poverty the utmost riches of
wisdom[423].’
But Richard of Bury notices a tendency among the ‘religious’ to
subordinate the love of books to
‘the threefold superfluous care of the belly, clothes, and
houses[424],’
and the tendency became much stronger after his time. The almost[425]
total absence of books in the bequests to the Oxford Franciscans in the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries is the more striking because of the
frequency of such bequests to colleges. It is said that the Minorites sold
many of their books to Dr. Thomas Gascoigne[426]. Certain it is that in
the latter days they parted with them, just as ‘forcyd by necessitie,’
they parted with their jewels and plate[427]. The exclusion of the
Mendicant Friars from the use of the University Library by the statutes of
1412[428], cannot have been any real hardship to the Franciscans so long
as their own library was intact. In the sixteenth century however this was
no longer the case, and we accordingly find some instances of Franciscans
supplicating for admission to the library of the University[429]. The
earliest instance is in 1507; but, as the registers from 1463 to 1505 are
lost, it would of course be ridiculous to attempt to draw from this fact
any inference as to the date of the dispersion of the books of the
Minorites. Leland visited the Friary shortly before the Dissolution, and
we have from his pen the last description of the once famous
library[430]:--
‘At the Franciscans’ house there are cobwebs in the library, and moths
and bookworms; more than this--whatever others may boast--nothing, if
you have regard to learned books. For I, in spite of the opposition of
all the friars, carefully examined all the bookcases of the library.’
CHAPTER V.
PLACE OF OXFORD IN THE FRANCISCAN ORGANIZATION.
Learned friars as practical workers among the people.--Their
sermons.--Educational organization throughout the country.--Relations
of the Oxford School to the Franciscan Schools of Europe.--English
Franciscans teach at foreign Universities.--Oxford as the head of a
_custodia_.--Provincial chapters held at Oxford.
If the Franciscans became leaders of scholastic thought, they were first
and foremost practical workers. ‘Unfitted as the works of Roger Bacon or
of Raymond Lully might seem to the practical divine, it was for him, not
for the philosophic disputant, whether as a missionary among the Saracens
or a combatant of error and heresy at home, that these works were
written[431].’ In the case of Roger Bacon this is abundantly evident.
‘Before all,’ he writes[432], ‘the utility of everything must be
considered; for this utility is the end for which the thing exists....
The utility of philosophy is in its bearing on theology and the church
and state and the conversion of infidels and the reprobation of those
who cannot be converted[433].... The end of all sciences, and their
mistress and queen,’ is moral philosophy, ‘for this alone teaches the
good of the soul[434].’
It is difficult to resist the temptation of quoting more passages of this
kind[435] (illustrating as they do the Franciscan view of life),
especially as, in the dearth of records, actual instances are hard to
find: one proof however may be brought that it was not all theory. Among
the twenty-two Oxford Minorites, for whom in the year 1300 the Provincial,
Hugh of Hertepol, claimed the episcopal licence to hear the confessions
of the crowds who thronged to the church of St. Francis, eight were then
or afterwards doctors of divinity and theological lecturers to the Friars
at Oxford, and among the others were two names of yet greater fame, Robert
Cowton and John Duns Scotus[436]. It must however be added that, of the
eight friars who were actually licensed by the bishop to hear confessions,
none appears as having subsequently lectured or taken a degree[437].
Here however we may see how the Franciscans brought their philosophy to
the test of experience in the details of everyday life; and they possessed
to a remarkable degree, in spite of--perhaps because of--their learning,
the power of appealing to the hearts of the people.
‘It is the first step in wisdom,’ said Roger Bacon, ‘to have regard to
the persons to whom one speaks[438],’
and his brethren followed this principle in their preaching. ‘Their
sermons,’ says Brewer, ‘are full of pithy stories and racy anecdotes; now
introducing some popular tradition or legend, now enforcing a moral by
some fable or allegory[439].’ It has often occasioned surprise that the
generation which saw the rise of poetry in England, saw also the rise of
English prose--that, in a word, Wiclif was the contemporary of Chaucer.
When we remember that, for a century and a half, men versed in all the
learning of their time had been constantly preaching to the people in the
vulgar tongue in every part of the country, we shall see less cause to
wonder at the vigorous language, the clear and direct expression, of ‘the
father of English prose.’
For the learning of the friars was not confined to the Universities[440].
To the Franciscans Oxford was more than a place for study; it was the
centre of a great educational organization which extended throughout the
land.
‘The gift of wisdom,’ to quote Eccleston’s words, ‘so overflowed in
the English province, that before the deposition of Friar William of
Nottingham, there were thirty lecturers in England who solemnly
disputed, and three or four who lectured without disputation. For he
had assigned in the Universities students for each convent, to succeed
to the lecturers on their death or removal[441].’
However, in practice this rule was not very strictly adhered to. Sometimes
a friar would pursue his studies with a view to becoming reader to a
particular convent[442]; but usually, when an ‘extra-university’
lectureship was founded or fell vacant, the convent applied to the
Provincial Minister for any lecturer they chose[443]. Thus about the year
1250, the brethren at Norwich requested that Friar Eustace of Normanville
should be appointed as their lecturer[444]. Eustace, after consulting Adam
Marsh, declined the office with the Minister’s permission, alleging in
excuse his weak health and his want of the necessary training and
experience; and Adam informed Robert de Thornham, custodian of the
Cambridge ‘Custody,’ in which Norwich was situated, of the decision[445].
The appointments, like those of the Oxford lecturers, were in the hands of
the Provincial Chapter, and the various convents obtained letters of
recommendation from powerful patrons in support of their candidate[446].
The lecturer was appointed for one year, and could be re-elected by the
Provincial Chapter at the request of the convent[447]. Nor was it only to
brethren of their own Order that the friars were sent. For many years a
Franciscan was theological lecturer to the monks of Christchurch,
Canterbury, till at length in 1314 one of his pupils was able to take his
place. His teaching, wrote the monks, in grateful recollection of their
‘lector,’
‘in urbe redolet Cantuarie, ac plures nostre congregacionis fratres
ipsius sedulos auditores ita sacre scripture aspersione intima
fecundavit, quod ipsos ad lectoris officium in scolis nostris
subeundum ydoneos reputamus; nos unum de fratribus et commonachis
nostris predictis loco dicti fratris Roberti ad hujusmodi ministerium
exequendum duximus subrogare[448].’
Thus the friars disseminated over the country, from the universities
outwards, the ‘New Learning’ of the thirteenth century.
But the fame of the Franciscan school at Oxford was not only English, but
European[449]. Friars were sent thither to study not only from
Scotland[450] and Ireland[451], but from France and Aquitaine[452],
Italy[453], Spain[454], Portugal[455], and Germany[456]; while many of the
Franciscan schools on the Continent, both in universities and
elsewhere[457], drew their teachers from England, and, in England, mainly
from Oxford. Eccleston mentions a friar who studied with him at Oxford,
where his lectures, after some failures, won the admiration of Grostete;
afterwards, as his fame increased, he was called by the Minister-General
to Lombardy, and enjoyed a great reputation even at the Papal court[458].
Grostete, on his return from the Council of Lyons, was anxious to get Adam
Marsh out of the neighbourhood of Paris as soon as possible.
‘It is not safe,’ he writes to the Provincial Minister, ‘to let Adam
stay there; for many greatly desire to keep him at Paris, especially
now that Alexander of Hales and John de Rupellis are dead; and so both
you and I shall be deprived of our greatest comfort[459].’
At another time[460] the General writes to the Provincial Minister of
England, requesting him to send English friars to Paris to teach; it was
probably on this occasion that Richard of Cornwall[461] left Oxford to win
the applause of his hearers at Paris. Peckham received his early education
in the schools of his Order at Oxford, and lectured at Paris and at the
Court of Rome[462]. Among those whom the Oxford Convent sent to teach in
the universities of the Continent, were John Wallensis, William of
Gainsborough, Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham[463]. All
these names belong to the thirteenth or early fourteenth century; from
that time onwards international jealousies and wars rendered the connexion
of the English universities with Paris far less close, and contemporaneous
with this breach was the beginning of the intellectual decline of the
Order of St. Francis.
Oxford was the head of a ‘custody,’ which contained, according to the list
given by Bartholomew of Pisa[464], seven other convents, namely, Reading,
Bedford, Stamford (Linc.), Nottingham, Northampton, Leicester, and
Grantham. What exactly the organization of a ‘_custodia_’ was, it is
impossible to determine; it was probably always rather indefinite, and
Bartholomew of Pisa points out that in early records the word is used very
loosely[465]. Perhaps it was originally intended to hold chapters of
custodies[466], as well as of provinces and convents. The Custodian had in
early years the right of making and enforcing byelaws in his custody; thus
‘in the custody of Oxford at the head of which Friar Peter was for
twelve years, the brethren did not use pillows up to the time of Friar
Albert the minister[467].’
Each custody had its special characteristic, Oxford being chiefly
remarkable for study[468]. Two Custodians of Oxford, Peter of Tewkesbury
and John of Stamford, became Provincial Ministers[469]. At first the
Wardens of the convents were appointed by the Custodian[470], but in 1240
the right of election was transferred to the convents themselves, and many
friars at the same time demanded the total abolition of the Custodian’s
office, on the ground that it was superfluous[471]. It continued however,
to exist down to the Dissolution and seems to have implied a general right
of supervision; the Custodian was a kind of permanent _visitator_[472].
Several Provincial Chapters were held at Oxford. It was probably a
Conventual, not a Provincial Chapter, before which Grostete, then ‘reading
the act at the Friars Minors,’ preached his sermon in praise of poverty
and mendicancy[473]. Here Albert of Pisa held his first chapter as
Provincial Minister of England, and announced the stern principles which
were to guide his government[474]. Soon after this Elias instituted a
severe visitation throughout the Order, and sent Friar Wygmund or Wygred,
a German, as visitor to England in 1237 or 1238[475]. He held chapters at
London, Southampton, Gloucester, and Oxford[476]. At the latter place the
Warden, Friar Eustace de Merc, was bitterly attacked and excluded a day
and a half from the chapter, though his innocence seems to have been
eventually established[477]. The inquisitorial methods adopted by the
visitor raised a storm of opposition throughout the province, which found
expression, on the completion of the visitation, in a Provincial Chapter
held at Oxford in the summer or autumn of 1238[478]. Here a solemn appeal
to Rome was formulated, and exemption claimed from all visitations, except
those authorized by the General Chapter[479]. The result of this and
similar appeals from the Order was the final deposition of Elias by the
Pope on the 15th of May, 1239[480].
In the spring or early summer of 1248 the Minister-General, John of Parma,
held a Provincial Chapter at Oxford,
‘in which he confirmed the provincial constitutions concerning poverty
in living and buildings (_de parsimonia et paupertate aedificiorum_).
And when he gave the friars the option of confirming or deposing the
Provincial Minister (W. of Nottingham), they unanimously asked that he
might be confirmed[481].’
Eccleston states that in the same chapter the Minister-General
‘recalled the brethren to unity who had begun to surpass the rest in
singular opinions[482].’
For this chapter the King provided one cask of wine and the necessaries of
life[483]. In 1289 three of the four Orders celebrated their Provincial
Chapters at Oxford, that of the Minorites taking place on the feast of the
Nativity of the Virgin (Sept. 8)[484]. No account of the proceedings
remains.
The next Provincial Chapter at Oxford about which we have any information
was held in 1405, at a critical period in the history of the Order in
England. In 1404 ‘a great and very scandalous schism’ arose among the
Franciscans owing to the arbitrary and unconstitutional conduct of the
Provincial, John Zouch[485]. The friars appealed to the Protector of the
Order, the Cardinal-bishop of Sabina, who appointed Friars Nicholas
Fakenham and John Mallaert commissioners, with power to depose the
Provincial, if necessary. The commissioners deposed him in his absence,
called a chapter at Oxford on May 3rd[486], and proceeded to elect a
successor. The Vicar of the Provincial forbade the friars to attend the
chapter.
‘And the commissioners prayed the King to order the friars to assemble
at the chapter at Oxford for the reformation of their religion; and
they obtained royal briefs about this matter[487].’
John Zouche was afterwards reinstated by the Protector of the Order, but
does not seem to have ever made good his authority over the English
Province[488].
CHAPTER VI.
RIVALRY BETWEEN THE ORDERS: ATTACKS ON THE FRIARS.
Rivalry between Friars Preachers and Minors: proselytism.--Politics
and Philosophy.--Peckham and the Oxford friars.--Evangelical
Poverty.--Contrast between theory and practice.--Attack on the friars
by Richard Fitzralph.--Charge of stealing children.--Wiclif’s early
relations to the friars.--His attack on them in his later
years.--Charges of gross immorality made not by Wiclif, but by his
followers.--The University and the friars: summary of events in
1382.--Unpopularity of the friars in the fifteenth century.--Foreign
Minorites expelled from Oxford.--Conspiracies against Henry IV; part
taken by Oxford Franciscans.--Conventual and Observant friars.
It was inevitable that a spirit of rivalry should exist between the two
great Mendicant Orders; and the rivalry soon developed into antagonism. In
the thirteenth century one lecturer to the Friars Minors at Oxford was
removed from the convent, another was suspended from lecturing, for
causing offence to the Friars Preachers and at their request[489]. An
‘enormous scandal of discord,’ in Matthew Paris’ words[490], arose in the
year 1243, each of the two Orders claiming precedence of the other. Though
there is little direct evidence on the point, there is no doubt that
Oxford was one of the chief scenes of conflict. The controversy was
carried on by ‘men of education and scholars[491],’ and some details of it
are preserved in the pages of Eccleston. It arose from the proselytising
tendencies of the two Orders[492]. The Dominicans, according to
Eccleston[493],
‘were wont to profess on the day of their entry, if they liked, as did
Friar R. Bacun[494] of good memory.’
Friar Albert of Pisa, when Provincial Minister of England, obtained a bull
from Gregory IX prohibiting this practice:
‘the Friars Preachers were not to bind anyone so as to prevent him
entering any Order he chose, nor were the friars to admit their
novices to profession till the year of probation had been
completed[495].’
The Dominicans on their side claimed similar privileges, and obtained a
bull from Innocent IV to the effect that
‘no Friar Minor should receive those bound to them (_suos obligatos_);
if he did so, he should be excommunicated _de facto_; and they
consented to the same privilege about those bound to us.’
Eccleston complains that the Dominicans made such good use of the bull
that ‘they let scarcely any one go;’ and regards this equitable
arrangement as a great hardship to his Order. ‘But not long,’ he adds,
‘did this tribulation last;’ Friars William of Nottingham and Peter of
Tewkesbury obtained from Innocent IV a revocation of his
constitution[496].
The antagonism between the two Orders did not stop here, and in many of
the great questions of the day they are found on opposite sides. The
Oxford Franciscans, as we have already seen, were among the staunchest
supporters of Simon de Montfort; the Oxford Dominicans seem to have sided
with the King. The famous Mad Parliament, which Henry III summoned to
Oxford in 1258, met in the convent of the Black Friars, and Prince Edward
and his retainers stayed there before the battle of Lewes[497].
The same rivalry made itself felt in the sphere of philosophy, and the
Franciscans dealt a heavy blow at their more orthodox adversaries by
impugning successfully an important doctrine of Thomas Aquinas[498]. The
Angelic Doctor had held with Aristotle and against Averroes that the
individualising principle was not form but matter. How then, asked his
opponents, could the individual exist in the non-material world[499]? Such
a doctrine was in contradiction to the mediaeval theory of heaven and the
life after death; and the Church rallied to the side of the Franciscans.
At Oxford, Archbishop Kilwardby, Dominican though he was, condemned this
among many other errors in 1276, but the sentence seems to have had little
effect at the time[500]. It was chiefly against this opinion that
Peckham’s measures in 1284 were directed[501]. If the Dominicans had
allowed the aspersion cast on their greatest teacher to pass without
serious protest when the condemnation came from one of themselves, they
were anything but content to submit to the adverse judgment of one of
their rivals. Peckham was attacked both by the Provincial of the Black
Friars in a congregation at Oxford[502] and in an anonymous pamphlet
apparently by a Cambridge Dominican[503]--‘a cursed page and infamous
leaf,’ as he describes it, ‘whose beginning is headless, whose middle
malignant, and whose end foolish and formless.’ His action further
involved the whole of the Franciscan Order in England in the storm. He was
accused of ‘having sown discord between the Orders[504];’ and to defend
himself against the charge of unduly favouring the Franciscans, he denied
that he had consulted the latter on the subject and insisted on the
previous condemnation of the same error by his predecessor[505]. He
claimed to be actuated by no personal animus against the dead, whom he
held in high honour and whom he had himself defended; his attack was
directed against ignorant and arrogant men who presumed to teach what they
did not know and to entice youths to the same errors. ‘We cannot and dare
not,’ he urged, ‘fail to rescue our children, as far as we can, from the
traps of error;’ and he forbade ‘curious theologians’ to defend the
condemned doctrines in ‘the disputes of boys’ (_in certaminibus
puerilibus_) at Oxford.
‘We by no means,’ he adds, ‘reprobate the studies of philosophers, so
far as they serve the mysteries of theology, but the profane novelties
which, contrary to philosophic truth, have been introduced into the
heights of theology in the last twenty years, to the injuries of the
saints.’
The question became a matter rather of feeling than of argument; the
_esprit de corps_ of the rival factions was involved, and the two Orders
further estranged[506].
Peckham lost few opportunities of advancing the interests of the
Mendicants at the expense of the monks and secular clergy, and of his
brother Franciscans against the other Orders. The discipline and morals of
the nuns of Godstow had suffered owing to the proximity of their house to
the university-town, and the Archbishop, in his injunctions for the better
government of the same, appointed two Friars Preachers and two Friars
Minors (or four of each if necessary) as permanent confessors to the
Convent[507]. In 1291 he wrote to the Prior of St. Frideswide’s urging him
to confer the church of St. Peter le Bailey on some one devoted to the
Friars Minors and nominated by them[508]. While strenuously asserting the
right of the Minorites to hear confessions in spite of the opposition of
the parish priests[509], he forbade the Carmelites and Austin Friars at
Oxford to hear any confessions of any persons whatsoever, regular or
secular, clerk or lay, male or female, and ordered the Archdeacon, if they
disobeyed, to pronounce public sentence of excommunication on them[510].
Arguing that ‘it was lawful to change a vow for a better one[511],’ he
maintained that the Franciscans might, as they had hitherto done, admit
members of other religious bodies to their Order; he would, he wrote to
the Chancellor of the University of Oxford, himself admit them, if he were
still Provincial Minister.
‘We have heard with great surprise,’ he proceeds, ‘that the Prior and
friars of the Order of St. Augustine in Oxford are imposing the mark
of excommunication on the Friars Minors of Oxford, and defaming them
in many ways, for receiving one of their friars in the aforesaid
canonical form. We therefore order you to go in person to the Austin
friary and warn them, in our name and by our authority, to cease from
these detractions. But if they assert that they have raised this
tumult against the Minorites on the ground of some privilege of
theirs, you shall ask them to let me have a copy of their privilege to
compare with those of the Minorites which we have to maintain; and we
will certainly not allow them to be molested in contravention of their
privilege; nor will we endure that the Friars Minors be injuriously
oppressed, for by so doing we should break the commands of the
Pope[512].’
Peckham further, while condemning the erroneous opinions of the Dominicans
at Oxford, denied the claim to superiority which they put forward[513].
The Franciscans claimed precedence on the ground of their humility (which
of course dwindled in inverse ratio as their assertion of it grew), and of
their absolute poverty. The Archbishop enunciated the formula which was
condemned by the inquisitors and the Pope in the next century, and which
formed, so to speak, the text of the controversy, ‘_De paupertate
Christi_.’ He defined the poverty of the apostles to be
‘having no title to the possession of any property real or personal,
private or common[514];’
the Minorites in following this example were in a state of ‘perfection,’
and lived a holier life than any other Order in the Church.
The claim was generally admitted, and led to the exaltation of the
Minorites in the eyes of the world at the expense of the other
Orders[515]. As early as 1269 a controversy on this point arose between
the convents of the two Orders at Oxford. A Dominican named Solomon of
Ingeham accused the Minorites of receiving money either with their own
hands or through a third party[516]. The Franciscans denied the charge and
demanded the punishment of Friar Solomon. The Dominicans asked them to
prove the falsehood of Solomon’s assertion and promised then to punish
him. ‘The burden of proof,’ replied the Franciscans, ‘lies with you who
affirm, not with us who deny.’ The Dominicans brought forward many
instances in which they maintained that the Minorites had actually
received money. These, answered the latter, were merely personal
transgressions, and affected the community no more than any case of carnal
sin or disobedience. The Dominicans, however, based their contention
mainly on the argument that money bequeathed to the Franciscans must be
received either by them in person or by intermediaries on their behalf.
The Minorites answered
‘that, according to the definition of lawyers, money left by will is
counted among the goods of the deceased until it passes into the
_dominium_ and property of the legatee. But it cannot become ours by
legal right or pass into our _dominium_ without our consent. Thus
money, howsoever it may be deposited by the executors or committed to
anyone for the brethren, is always counted among the goods of the
deceased as long as it remains unspent, and the executors can, by
their own authority or by that of the deceased, reclaim it at
pleasure. How then can it be called ours?’
Peace was eventually restored by the interposition of the Chancellor and
leading secular masters, at whose recommendation Friar Solomon withdrew
his words. It is curious that neither the document containing the account
of this quarrel, nor Peckham, mention the explanation which afterwards
became the accepted theory, that the ownership of the goods of the
Franciscans was vested in the Pope. Yet this explanation was originally
given by Innocent IV in 1245[517].
As far as the bulk of the Franciscan Order was concerned, the controversy
on ‘Evangelical Poverty’ was purely a theoretical one[518], its ultimate
importance rather accidental than real. The claim to ‘this perfitnesse,’
as Daw Topias contemptuously calls it, rested not on fact but on a legal
construction. The friars had only the use, not the proprietorship, of
their lands and houses and goods. John XXII by his bull, ‘_Ad conditorem
canonum_,’ issued on the 8th of December, 1322, and declaring that use was
inseparable from proprietorship, withdrew from the Order the right of
holding property in the name of the Roman See, and thus went far to
destroy its theoretical claim to precedence. The whole Order, instead of
the party of the _Spirituales_ merely, was for a time banded against the
Pope; and the dispute about a legal quibble became transformed under the
hands of Ockham into an examination of the position and claims of the
Papacy, and of the whole relation of Church and State.
Ockham probably studied at Oxford in his younger days, but it was no doubt
later in life, and under the influence of Marsilius of Padua, that he
developed the doctrines which made him ‘at once the glory and the reproach
of his Order[519].’ In philosophy he had many followers at Oxford in the
fourteenth century, and the Franciscan Convent was, like the rest of the
University, divided on the questions of Nominalism and Realism[520]. The
dispute concerning the poverty of Christ was not allowed to rest. It was
this discussion which first brought the Archbishop of Armagh into open
hostility to the friars[521]; and Wiclif mentions the controversy as
being still carried on between the two Orders in his time.
‘Prechours seyn þat Crist hadde hiȝe shone as þei have; ffor ellis
wolde not Baptist mene þat Crist hadde þuongis of siche schone.
Menours seyn þat Crist went barfote, or ellis was shood as þei ben,
for ellis Magdalene shulde not have founde to þus have washid Cristis
feet[522].’
A great historian has said of the Middle Ages, that ‘at no time in the
world’s history has theory, pretending all the while to control practice,
been so utterly divorced from it[523].’ An extract from the Patent
Rolls[524] will afford a striking illustration of the truth of these words
as far as the learned Franciscans, the professors of evangelical poverty,
are concerned. The date is February 22nd, 1378; the writ is issued in the
King’s name.
‘Know that whereas certain horses, cups, books, money, silver vessels,
and diverse other goods and chattels, which belonged to our beloved
brother in Christ, John Welle of the Order of Friars Minors, doctor in
theology, have been abstracted and carried away out of his dwelling in
London by one Thomas Bele his servant and other evil doers, ... we
have of our special favour granted to the said John all the horses,
cups, books, money, vessels and other goods and chattels aforesaid,
wheresoever they may be,’ &c.
It was probably the glaring contrast between the lofty claims of the
friars and their actual life, rather than any inferiority in their
morality as compared with the secular priests, which exposed them to the
bitterest denunciations and taunts of the reformers. The Mendicants were
far more in sympathy with the poor than were the endowed monks, and
possessed far more than the parish priests the confidence of the
people[525]. Wiclif recognised this fact, while he lamented it.
‘Though it raine on the Awter of the Parish Church, the blind people
is so deceived, that they will rather give to waste houses of Friars,
then to Parish Churches, or to common waies, though men cattle and
beasts ben perished therein[526].’
The first important attack on the friars in the fourteenth century was
that led by Richard Fitzralph, Archbishop of Armagh. He had been Fellow of
Balliol College before 1325 and Chancellor of the University in 1333[527].
While assailing the whole principle of mendicancy, his main charge against
the friars, especially the friars at Oxford, was that of ‘stealing’
children, i.e. of secretly inducing them to enter the Mendicant Orders. In
1357 the Archbishop was cited to appear and defend himself before the
Papal Court at Avignon; and on the 8th of November, in a solemn assembly
of Pope and Cardinals, he made a great speech in defence of the parish
priests against the Mendicants[528]. The Archbishop stated that, owing to
the privileges of hearing confessions which the friars enjoyed, almost all
youths in the Universities, and in the houses of their parents (in nearly
all of which friars were to be found as ‘_familiares_’), had Mendicants as
their confessors.
‘Enticed by the wiles of the friars and by little presents[529], these
boys (for the friars cannot circumvent men of mature age) enter the
Orders, nor are they afterwards allowed, according to report, to get
their liberty by leaving the Order, but they are kept with them
against their will until they make profession; further, they are not
permitted, as it is said, to speak with their father or mother, except
under the supervision and fear of a friar; an instance came to my
knowledge this very day; as I came out of my inn an honest man from
England, who has come to this court to obtain a remedy, told me that
immediately after last Easter, the friars at the University of Oxford
abducted in this manner his son who was not yet thirteen years old,
and when he went there, he could not speak with him except under the
supervision of a friar.’
Parents were in consequence afraid to send their sons to the Universities,
and preferred to keep them at home as tillers of the soil. While the
numbers both of the friaries and of their inmates had enormously
increased, the number of secular students in every faculty decreased; the
students at Oxford, who in his time were reckoned at 30,000, had now sunk
to 6000.
Though these figures are of course preposterously exaggerated, and though
the main cause of the diminution of the number of students was the Black
Death, there can be no doubt of the essential truth of the accusation. In
1358 the University of Oxford passed a statute forbidding the admission of
boys under eighteen to the Orders. The statute deserves to be quoted at
length[530].
‘It is generally reported and proved by experience, that the nobles of
this realm, those of good birth, and very many of the common people,
are afraid, and therefore cease, to send their sons or relatives or
others dear to them in tender youth, when they would make most advance
in primitive sciences, to the University to be instructed, lest any
friars of the Order of Mendicants should entice or induce such
children, before they have reached years of discretion, to enter the
Order of the same Mendicants; and because owing to the admission of
such boys to the Mendicant Orders, the tranquillity of the students of
the University has been often disturbed; therefore the said
University, zealous in the bowels of piety both for the number of her
sons and the quiet of her students, has ordained and decreed, that if
any of the Order of Mendicants shall receive to their habit in this
University, or induce, or cause to be received or induced, any such
youth before the completion of his eighteenth year at least, or shall
send such an one away from the University or cause him to be sent
away, in order that he may be received into the same Order elsewhere:
then _eo ipso_ no one of the cloister or community of such a friar,
... being a graduate, shall during the year immediately following,
read or attend lectures in this University or elsewhere where such
exercises would count as discharge of the statutable requirements in
this University (_vel alibi quod in hac Vniversitate pro forma aliqua
sibi cedat_); and this penalty shall be inflicted on all those of the
Order of Mendicants, and the associates of all those, who shall be
convicted by credible persons of having withdrawn youths in any way
from the University, or from hearing philosophy.’
The friars did not deny the charge, but defended their conduct[531], and
exerted themselves to the utmost to obtain a repeal of the statute. Their
efforts were successful. While a suit which they had begun in the Roman
Court was yet undecided, the Provincials of the four Orders laid their
grievances before the King in Parliament[532]. In 1366 the obnoxious
statute was formally annulled, on condition that the friars’ suits at
Rome and elsewhere against the University should cease[533]. The latter,
however, did not abandon the struggle; its influence is probably to be
seen in the petition of the Commons in 1402[534], that no one be allowed
to enter any of the four Orders under the age of twenty-one years. The
King’s answer was not favourable: he ordained merely that no friar should
admit to his Order an infant under fourteen years without the assent of
his father, mother, or guardians. The ordinance applied to the whole of
England, and the petition of the Commons is a sign that the popularity of
the friars had suffered under the attacks of Wiclif.
It has been clearly shown by recent criticism[535] that Wiclif’s enmity to
the friars was confined to the last few years of his life. His earlier
opponents were the monks--the _religiosi possessionati_. At one time he
compares the poverty and mendicancy of St. Francis with the manual labour
of St. Peter and St. Paul, in contrast with the possessions and worldly
honours of the ecclesiastics of his time[536]. He seems to have been on
terms of some intimacy with William Woodford, who may be regarded as the
leader of the Oxford Minorites in their subsequent controversy with the
reformer and his followers. Woodford relates[537] that
‘when I was lecturing concurrently with him on the Sentences[538] ...
Wiclif used to write his answers to the arguments, which I advanced to
him, in a notebook which I sent him with my arguments, and to send me
back the notebook.’
Wiclif had indeed many points of sympathy, especially on questions of
ecclesiastical polity, with the Friars Minors. He was in agreement with
them and in antagonism to the monks and many of the bishops, in the
opinion that the tribute to the Pope should be refused, and that the
secular power was, under some circumstances, justified in depriving the
Church of its possessions[539]. Eight or nine years before Wiclif wrote
his famous tract in defence of the Parliament of 1366, an Oxford friar and
doctor declared in his school that the King had the right of depriving
ecclesiastics of their temporalities; he was ordered by Congregation to
recant this and other opinions solemnly after a University sermon, and to
pay 100_s._ to the University[540].
When, however, Wiclif began to call in question the Church’s doctrine on
the Eucharist, he found himself in direct antagonism to the friars; and
the quarrel, which began in a dogmatic difference in the schools[541],
soon acquired a wider character. Wiclif’s accusations resolve themselves
really into three[542]; firstly, that the friars upheld the ‘idolatrous’
doctrine of the Eucharist; secondly, that they maintained the theory of
the mendicancy of Christ; thirdly, that they taught the people to rely for
their salvation on letters of fraternity and prayers and masses, instead
of on a good life; whence a general demoralization ensued.
‘Popis graunten no pardoun to men bot if þei be byfore verrely
contritte, bot þese freris in hor lettres speken of no
contricioun[543].’
It is improbable, however, that the indulgences granted by the friars
differed from the other indulgences of the Middle Ages, which in theory
absolved from the temporal punishment, not from the sin and eternal
punishment. Wiclif may have classed with the friars the ‘pardoners’ who
did not belong to any of the four Orders[544]. The records relating to the
Franciscan house at Oxford throw no light on the matter, which indeed
belongs to the general history of the Mendicants, not to the history of a
particular convent. Wiclif’s charges amount practically to this: the
friars were the foremost champions of the external, unspiritual form of
religion, which he laboured to destroy: they were no longer leaders of
thought, but obstacles to progress.
Though Wiclif’s writings, especially his English writings, are full of
violent invective against the friars[545], it is difficult to find in them
any definite accusations of the grosser forms of immorality. One instance
will sufficiently illustrate the difference between Wiclif and his
followers.
‘Friars also,’ says the former, ‘be foully envenomed with ghostly sin
of Sodom, and so be more cursed than the bodily Sodomites that were
suddenly dead by hard vengeance of God; for they do ghostly lechery by
God’s word, when they preach more their own findings for worldly muck,
than Christ’s Gospel for saving of men’s souls[546].’
‘Jack Upland’ improves on this, and does not scruple to impute to the
friars generally the vilest sins.
‘Your freres ben taken alle day
with wymmen and wifes,
bot of your privey sodomye
spake I not yette[547].’
At Oxford the seculars, always numerically strong and jealous of the
regulars, rallied to Wiclif’s standard; while the Mendicants roused the
anger of the University by appealing to external authority. The friars
were accused of having made use of their position as confessors to stir up
the peasant revolt. On the 18th of February, 1382, the heads of the four
Mendicant Convents at Oxford sent a letter to John of Gaunt, denying the
charge and begging his protection[548]; all evils were attributed to them,
and their lives were in danger. Their chief enemy was Nicholas Hereford.
In Lent of the same year Hereford preached a University sermon at St.
Mary’s, in which he argued that no ‘religious’ should be admitted to any
degree at Oxford[549]. He was appointed by the Chancellor to deliver the
principal English sermon of the year at St. Frideswide’s Cross on
Ascension Day (May 15th), and used the opportunity to attack monks and
friars and mendicancy in general[550]. On the 19th of the same month, the
‘Council of the Earthquake’ met at the Blackfriars in London, and
condemned ten of Wiclif’s conclusions as heretical and fourteen as
erroneous; among the seventeen doctors of divinity who took part in the
council were four Minorites, the Oxford Franciscans being represented by
Hugo Karlelle and Thomas Bernewell[551]. The Archbishop sent Peter Stokes,
a Carmelite, to publish the condemnation at Oxford. The Chancellor and
Proctors resented this interference with their rights, and the general
feeling was strong in Wiclif’s favour. Stokes and his brethren went in
fear of their lives; when the Carmelite ‘determined’ against Philip
Repyngdon on the 10th of June, men were seen in the schools with arms
concealed under their clothes. At length, on June 15th, the Chancellor was
compelled, by the King’s command, to publish the condemnation of the
twenty-four conclusions;
‘and he thus so roused the seculars against the religious that many of
the latter feared death, the seculars crying out that they wanted to
destroy the University, though really they (the religious) only
defended the cause of the Church[552].’
In November the University tried to turn the tables on its adversaries; in
an assembly of the clerks at St. Frideswide’s, the Chancellor accused some
of the orthodox party (among them a Minorite friar) of heresy[553]. But
from this time the sacramental controversy tended to retire into the
background, and the alliance of monks and friars, which Wiclif’s attack on
the faith had called into being[554], came to an end. In 1392, Henry
Crompe, a Cistercian monk, who had been a prominent opponent of Wiclif,
was charged with having determined on several occasions against the right
of the friars to hear confessions[555]. Friar John Tyssyngton and other
Minorites took part in his condemnation in a Convocation held in the house
of the Carmelites at Stamford. In their anxiety to silence their
adversaries, the Mendicant Orders proved false to the tradition common to
all the great mediaeval Universities--the tradition of intellectual
freedom; they upheld the claim of Archbishop Arundel to visit the
University, and lent their support to the rigid censorship which he
established[556]. But it is only fair to remember that, years before this,
the authority of the Church had been invoked against the teaching of the
friars themselves. In 1368 Simon Langham sent thirty errors of the friars
to the University, and it was enacted that no one should presume to defend
or approve these tenets in the schools or elsewhere ‘on pain of the
greater excommunication[557].’
The history of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries affords many other
illustrations of the hostility with which the friars, and especially the
Minorites, were regarded by the University. The subject of academical
degrees, and of the action taken by the University against the
‘wax-doctors,’ has been treated elsewhere. A statute, which probably dates
from the first half of the fifteenth century, provides that both the
_collatores_ of University sermons shall, if possible, be seculars[558].
Wood says that in the years 1423 and 1424 there
‘were nothing but heartburnings in the University occasioned by the
Friers their preaching up and down against tithes.’
The chief offender, Friar William Russell, warden of the Greyfriars of
London, taught that tithes might be given arbitrarily, i.e. not to the
parson legally entitled to them, but ‘for the pious use of the poor,’
according to the will of the giver. The University of Oxford condemned
this doctrine and ordained that everyone taking a degree should formally
abjure it: the oath, which remained in force till 1564, runs thus:--
_Insuper_, tu jurabis quod nullas conclusiones per fratrem Wilhelmum
Russell, ordinis Minorum, nuper positas et praedicatas, contra decimas
personales, et in nostra Universitate Oxoniae, necnon in venerabili
concilio episcoporum, anno Domini millesimo quadringentesimo vicesimo
quinto celebrato Londoniis, solemniter damnatas, nec alicujus earum
sententiam tenebis, docebis, vel defendes efficaciter publice aut
occulte, nec aliquem doctorem, tentorem vel defensorem hujusmodi, ope,
consilio vel favore juvabis[559].
For a similar offence another Franciscan, William Melton, D.D., was
arrested at the instance of the University, and compelled to recant[560].
The Alma Mater kept a vigilant eye on her sons wherever they might be. In
1482 Friar Isaac Cusack, D.D., began to create disturbances in Ireland by
preaching the old Franciscan doctrine of evangelical poverty; he was
captured, sent to Oxford, and degraded and expelled the University as a
vagabond and a heretic[561].
The feeling of nationality fostered by the long French wars was not
without its influence on the friars in England and especially at the
Universities. In 1369 the Chancellor caused a royal proclamation to be
published at Carfax ordering all French students at Oxford, both religious
and secular, to leave the kingdom[562]. In 1388 a royal writ was issued to
the Warden of the Friars Minors in Oxford at the advice of the same
convent, warning him to admit no foreign friars who might reveal to the
enemy ‘the secrets and counsel of our kingdom,’ and to expel any such
friars for whose good behaviour he would not be responsible, or who would
not pray or celebrate masses for the King and the good estate of the
realm[563].
Among the many problems presented by the reign of Richard II, not the
least obscure is the passionate loyalty with which the Franciscans
regarded his memory[564]. Yet Richard II and his councillors were
suspected of Lollardy, while his successor posed as the champion of
orthodoxy. Henry IV, however, derived his support chiefly from the wealthy
ecclesiastics, and the Lollardy of the Court of Richard II was rather
political than dogmatic; the opinions prevalent at the Court were more in
consonance with Wiclif’s earlier teaching and with the teaching of the
Franciscan Order on the need of poverty in the Church and the evils of its
endowments, than with the Lollard doctrine of the Eucharist. In the early
years of Henry IV the Franciscans were active in organizing
conspiracies[565]; the pulpit and the confessional were used to spread
disaffection against the new monarch[566]; and the failure of his
campaigns was attributed to the magical arts of the Friars Minors[567]. In
1402, eight Minorites of the convent of Leicester were seized, and
convicted on their own admission of having organized an armed revolt to
find King Richard and restore him to the throne[568]. They were condemned
to be hanged and decapitated at Tyburn, and the sentence was carried out
in the sight of many thousands without any ecclesiastical protest. One of
these friars was Roger Frisby, an old man and Master in Theology[569]. On
the Vigil of the feast of St. John the Baptist[570]--the very day on which
the rebels were to meet ‘in the plain of Oxford,’ his head was taken from
London Bridge and brought to Oxford;
‘and in the presence of the procession of the University, the herald
proclaimed: “This Master Friar Minor of the convent of Leicester in
hypocrisy, adulation, and false life, preached often, saying that King
Richard is alive, and roused the people to seek him in Scotland;” and
his head was set on a stake there[571].’
While subject to attacks from without, the Franciscan Order suffered from
rival factions within. The long-standing division between the lax or
Conventual, and the strict or Observant parties, at length received formal
recognition in the Council of Constance (1415) when the Observants were
constituted a semi-independent branch under a Vicar-General[572]. How did
this arrangement affect Oxford as a _studium generale_? The Observants as
a body produced few students; the reformed houses on the Continent
objected to send their brethren to Paris[573]. A few foreign Observants
found their way to Oxford in the fifteenth century[574]; and when later in
the century Observant friaries were founded in England[575], some of their
members studied in the Conventual house at the University[576]. Whether
any part of the Convent was set apart for them is unknown: according to
all appearance, the brethren of both branches lived together in peace and
goodwill.
CHAPTER VII.
ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE FRIARS’ MANNER OF LIFE AND MEANS OF LIVELIHOOD:
BENEFACTORS.
Lost records.--Mendicancy.--Procurators and limitors.--Career of Friar
Brian Sandon.--Charges of immorality against the friars.--Their
worldly manner of life before the Dissolution.--Poverty of the
Convent.--Sources of income.--Annual grants from the King and
others.--Frequency of bequests to the friars.--List of
benefactors.--Classes from which the friars were drawn.--Motives which
led men to become friars.
Of the internal economy of the Franciscan house at Oxford, or indeed of
any friary in England, little is known or ever can be known. The
_Registrum Fratrum Minorum Londoniae_ is, in Brewer’s words, ‘the only
work of the kind extant. A painful proof, if such were needed, of the
utter devastation committed when the Franciscan convents were dissolved,
and their libraries dispersed[577].’ We may here give some account of the
records which must once have existed in every Franciscan house or
province. From the earliest times an annual _compotus_[578] or
balance-sheet of income and expenditure was drawn up, and if in later days
this was sometimes omitted, an ex-warden was always liable to be called to
render an account to his successor[579]. In each convent would also be
kept a list of the brethren who died there[580]; and lists both of living
benefactors and of dead, for whose souls prayers or masses were to be
said[581], while many in their lifetime received ‘letters of
confraternity[582].’ In the decrees of the General Chapter of Paris in
1292 it is commanded[583] that each minister should have the lives and
acts of holy friars carefully collected in his province and entered in
special registers, and bring them to the General Chapter; also that all
notable excesses of friars, grave crimes, and credible accusations, the
sentences passed and punishments inflicted on the offenders, should be
noted in books kept for the purpose, preserved in the archives of the
province, and faithfully handed on to each succeeding minister. The acts
of Provincial Chapters were also kept[584]. Of these and similar records
we have, besides the London register already alluded to, only a few
letters of fraternity[585]. Of English Franciscan records originated by or
relating to the convent at Oxford, not one (unless the list of lectors and
the account of the controversy with the Dominicans in 1269[586] can be
called records) is known to exist[587]. Any account, therefore, of the
internal life of the convent must be meagre and unsatisfactory in the
highest degree.
The hours and numbers of daily services seem to have differed little, if
at all, from those observed in other monastic institutions[588]. We may
therefore omit this subject and treat of the points which receive
additional elucidation from documents relating to Oxford.
The first means of livelihood of the Mendicant Friars was naturally
begging. Certain of the brethren were appointed by the Warden to ‘procure’
food for the convent during some fixed period[589]. There were no definite
rules as to how many friars should be sent as ‘procuratores’ or
‘limitors’[590]; the details depended on the necessities of the convent
and the will of the Superior[591]. Each house had definite ‘limits’
assigned to it, within which its members might beg[592]. The friars went
two and two, accompanied by a servant or boy[593] who carried the
offerings, which were usually in kind. The friar in Chaucer’s ‘Sompnoure’s
Tale,’ himself a ‘maister[594]’ in the schools, after preaching in the
church went round the village--
‘In every hous he gan to pore and prye
And beggyd mele or chese, or ellis corn[595].’
A good deal of private begging was done by the student friars to obtain
the means of study[596]. Roger Bacon appealed to his brother in England,
to his powerful and wealthy acquaintances, for money to carry out the
commands of the Pope[597].
‘But how often (he writes to the latter) I was looked upon as a
dishonest beggar, how often I was repulsed, how often put off with
empty hopes, what confusion I suffered within myself, I cannot express
to you. Even my friends did not believe me, as I could not explain the
matter to them; so I could not proceed in this way. Reduced
(angustiatus) to the last extremities, I compelled my poor
friends[598] to contribute all that they had, and to sell many things
and to pawn the rest, often at usury, and I promised them that I would
send to you all the details of the expenses and would faithfully
procure full payment at your hands. And yet owing to their poverty I
frequently abandoned the work, frequently I gave it up in despair and
forbore to proceed.’
Begging of this kind would either be unauthorized or legalized by special
license. The statutes of the Order[599] enact that every convent shall
have its ‘procurator’ or ‘syndicus,’ who shall transact all the legal
business of the house and receive in the name of the Roman Church for the
use of the friars all pecuniary alms and bequests, or all such alms and
bequests as can be changed into money. The express object of these
constitutions was to
‘preserve the Order in its purity and prevent the brethren being
immersed in secular affairs[600].’
It would appear that at Oxford in the fourteenth century the office of
alms-collector was held by one of the brethren. This conclusion, however
contrary to the spirit and letter of the statutes, seems warranted by a
remarkable legal document of the year 1341[601]. It is the record of a
suit in the Hustings Court, in which Friar John of Ochampton, Warden of
the Friars Minors at Oxford, ‘through Friar John de Hentham his attorney,’
charged ‘Richard de Whitchford minor[602],’ with refusing to render an
account of the sums received by him when he was ‘receiver of pence of the
said warden,’ and with embezzling sixty shillings or more, which he
obtained from various people on the Monday after the feast of St. Michael,
1340. Two of the sums are specified, namely, one mark by the hands of
Richard, servant of John de Couton, and 12_s._ by the hands of Thomas of
London. The Warden claimed to have suffered loss to the extent of one
hundred shillings; Richard de Whitchford could not deny the receipt of the
money, but on his request the court appointed two auditors, Richard Cary
and John le Peyntour; to these he rendered an account, and was found to
be sixty shillings in arrears; ‘and,’ the record continues, ‘as he cannot
make satisfaction he is committed to prison.’
In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the Oxford friars sometimes
employed laymen to represent them in the courts[603]; sometimes the Warden
appeared in person[604], but most of the legal business in the
Chancellor’s court at Oxford was undertaken by one of the brethren. From
1507 or before, to the Dissolution, this duty was entrusted to Friar Brian
Sandon. His name does not occur in the University Register, and he was,
though a priest[605], probably not a student; indeed, his administrative
business would hardly have left him time for other occupations. Between
1507 and 1516 and between 1527 and 1534, he appears as plaintiff or
defendant in some fifteen suits in the Chancellor’s court[606]. Some of
these afford glimpses into the life of the friars. On the 26th of March,
1512[607], Father Brian instituted an action against John Morys, his
proctor, alleging that the latter
‘did not according to the convention before entered into between the
said friar and John Morys, bring corn to the house of the friars
minors;’
and on April 5th John Morys was committed to prison ‘at the instance of
the provost (_preposeti_) of the friars minors for a debt[608].’
But if the friars did not grow corn, they seem to have made use of their
meadows as pasture land. On the 20th of May, 1529[609], Friar Brian sued
Margery, widow of John Lock, for 7_s._ 8_d._,
‘for certain cheeses which the husband of the said Margery bought from
the aforesaid Brian Sanden.’
Eventually the case was submitted to the arbitration of William Clare the
elder, and Edmund Irishe, bailiffs of Oxford, with the addition of a third
if necessary, each party binding itself to abide by the decision of the
majority under penalty of 40_s._, in case of disagreement, to be paid to
the party willing to accept the judgment.
While these and similar actions were instituted by Brian in fulfilment of
the duties of his position, he was undoubtedly engaged in others of a
private nature. At one time he acts as attorney for a priest[610]. At
another he is charged with wrongfully keeping a knife, the property of
_dominus_ Galfred Coper[611]. In 1531[612] he had a dispute with his
tailor and appealed to the law, alleging
‘that, whereas he had given to William Gos[613], tailor, three yards
and three quarters of woollen cloth to make him a habit, the said Gos
had purloined one quarter of a yard, and that in consequence his
clothes were too short (_nimis brevem et succinctam_).’
Brian having declared on oath that he had supplied the above-mentioned
amount of cloth, Gos promised to give him 14_d._ as satisfaction for the
missing quarter of a yard. But later in the day he again appeared and
charged the friar with perjury. After some more recriminations an
agreement was come to out of court, and we hear no more of the habit.
That his litigious spirit should sometimes have brought Friar Brian into
trouble we cannot wonder. Several times in the latter part of his career
he was in danger of ‘bodily injury;’ in 1532[614] he made application to
have Robert Holder bound over to keep the peace, and in 1534 the judge
ordered that James Penerton should not be released from Bocardo till he
found sufficient sureties that he would not inflict bodily harm on Friar
Brian or his friends (_familiaribus_)[615]. The same year he complained of
having been libelled by one Giles Mawket, a carpenter (_fabro lignario_),
in the parish of St. Ebbe’s[616]. This was probably a slander on his
character, which was not above suspicion. In 1535[617] ‘a woman of Radley
named Anna’ asserted in the Commissary’s court that she was with child by
Thomas Denson, Bachelor of Laws:
‘qui Denson (as the record puts it, reciting the evidence of Joanna
Cowper, another woman of ill-fame) egre tulit ut extraneus quisque
familiaritate dicte Anne uteretur; because (it is added in the margin)
he tok fryer Bryan wrastelyng w{th} her in a morning[618].’
The records of the Chancellor’s court contain charges of immorality
against two other Friars Minors[619]. The first was ‘_dompnus_’ Robert
Beste[620], who was summoned before the court together with a scholar of
Broadgates Hall,
‘on grave suspicion of incontinence and disturbance of the peace.’
‘Then the judge commanded ‘_dompnus_’ Beste to go to the prison house,
namely le Bocardo, and remain there for half-an-hour’--
apparently while his case was considered. It does not appear what the
charge against him was, or what (if any) further steps were taken[621].
His companion was warned to moderate his attentions to the same Joanna,
wife of William Cooper or Cowper, of St. Ebbe’s, who appeared in the trial
above referred to.
Joanna seems to have taken a special interest in the Minorites. At the end
of 1533[622] Friar Arthur, B.D., appealed to the court to stop her
spreading evil reports against him, which she had failed to prove; she was
ordered to abstain in future
‘from defaming the said friar or any of his house on pain of a fine of
40_s._ to be paid to the Convent of friars minors, and banishment from
the town; also that she shall not in any way lay traps (_paret ...
insidias_) for the said Arthur or any of his Order or cause such traps
to be laid, under the aforesaid penalties.’
But if Friar Arthur was innocent, he was peculiarly unfortunate. A few
months later[623] he again appealed for protection against the libels of
Nicholas Andrews and John Poker, scholars of Peckwater’s Inn. At this time
Dr. Baskerfeld, Warden of the Grey Friars, was acting as substitute for
the Commissary, and he heard the case in the house of the Minorites. The
accusation has been carefully obliterated in the Chancellor’s book,
evidently by the friars themselves, but the gist of it can be deciphered.
‘Judex interrogavit eosdem an voluissent prefatum Arcturum accusare et
denunciare: qui responderunt se nolle[624] hoc facere ...; a quibus
judex petiit ... an aliquid scandalosum et d ... scirent contra dictum
fratrem, et interrogavit eos quid hoc erat: et dicebant ambo hiis
verbis sequentibus (tactis evangeliis); ... they saw the seyde frere
Arctur in a chambre at the sygne of the Bere in all hollows parische
in Oxoford with a woman in a red capp ... both locked together in a
chambre, and seid to the mayd of the hous, “then ba ... why ... suche
ale here to be kept? It is not thy masters will and thy mistres that
ony suche ale shold be kept here.”’
Friar Arthur strenuously denied the accusation, and the court adjourned
for two hours. When it reassembled, the defendants refused to submit to
Dr. Baskerfeld’s jurisdiction, arguing that he was incompetent to decide a
case in which one of the members of his convent was so deeply implicated.
Two days later, however, they confessed before the judge that they would
not swear to their original statement, and both sides promised to forgive
and forget the whole matter.
Though none of these charges was actually proved, we must admit that they
show that the convent was not in a healthy state on the eve of the
Dissolution. There is certainly no trace of the religious fervour by which
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/42587