The records of this alien settlement for many years consist mainly of
statements of the gifts received from various important persons. The
community seems to have flourished, and their work, both in London and
in the Pyrenees, continued to deserve the sympathy and support of their
pious benefactors. There is evidence that they possessed property in
Norwich, Canterbury, Oxford, Pevensey, Southampton, and elsewhere, and
that they received certain revenues from Ireland and from Scotland. It
is easy to understand that their Irish revenues may have been
considerable on account of the great estates possessed by the Marshall
family in Leinster. It is clear also that the Convent had the advantage
of royal favour and patronage, for the English records contain several
confirmations of valuable gifts from both Henry III and Edward I,
derived from royal property situated in the South of France, to the
mother house in the Pyrenees. One of the most interesting of these gifts
is the rent to be derived for the benefit of the Convent from the King’s
lands in the town of Myramand, previously granted to Eleanor, the Queen
Mother. This grant is specially mentioned in the same document as
another endowment derived from the same source to be paid to the Abbey
of Fontevraud. This benefaction to the House of Roncesvalles gives the
measure of respect in which it was held, for an English king who placed
the house of Roncesvalles in the same category as the Abbey of
Fontevraud as worthy of support must have felt the claims of the Convent
in the Pyrenees in the strongest possible way. Edward’s Angevin
ancestors had been buried in the Church of Fontevraud for generations,
and there was no ecclesiastical foundation possessing a greater claim on
the munificence of the Angevin family than this Abbey.
The little that is known of the domestic progress of the House at
Charing, in addition to such general indications as are given of its
financial condition, concerns the appointment of certain officials. In
the year 1278, and again in 1280, a certain Henry, son of William of
Smalebrook, was appointed as his attorney for two years on each occasion
by the Prior of the Hospital of Roncesvalles. The inference to be
derived from this is that the weakness inherent in all the alien houses
had already begun to show itself in the community at Charing. The
management of the estates in England was entrusted to agents in this
country, with the consequence that maladministration of their affairs
was very apt to take place, and, as a result, opportunities frequently
arose for the interference of neighbouring magnates or of the King
himself with the affairs of the alien religious houses.
Complications of this nature must have taken place about this time at
the House at Charing. In the year 1283 a certain Brother Lupus appears
upon the scene for the first time. His position in England seems to have
been that of envoy coming from the Pope, but in the same record he is
described as a priest, envoy and preceptor of the Houses in England and
Ireland of the Prior and Convent of the Hospital of St. Mary
Roncesvalles, and he no doubt had instructions to supervise the
management of their estates. The arrival of Brother Lupus, “streight
comen fro the court of Rome,” with indulgences for the remission of
sins, is an interesting proof that even so early as the year 1283 the
sale of indulgences was one of the special functions of the brethren of
Roncesvalles, and was no doubt a source of considerable income to the
Priory[8]. Chaucer, writing a hundred years later, alludes, in his
characteristic ironical manner, to this side of the activities of the
Canons of Roncesvalles;[9] and even so late as the year 1432, when the
House in London had come under the influence of the English clergy, a
special effort was made to preserve this source of profit.
Footnote 8:
An instructive example is afforded by the exploits of Ralph de
“Runcevill,” who is stigmatized as a vagabond monk, but who was
nevertheless strong enough to retain possession of the Priory of
Goldcliff in the Marches of Wales (near Newport, Monmouthshire) in
spite of the efforts of his superior, the Abbot of the very important
Convent of Bec-Hellouin, in Normandy, of which the House at Goldcliff
was a “Cell,” “Calend. Pat. Rolls,” 12-14, Ed. II, (1319-1321).
Footnote 9:
“A Somner was ther with us in that place,
That had a fyr-reed cherubinnes face.”
* * * *
“With him ther rood a gentil Pardoner
Of Rouncival, his freend and his compeer,
That streight was comen fro the court of Rome.
Ful loude he song ‘Com hider, love, to me.’
This somnour bar to him a stiff burdoun,
Was never trompe of half so greet a soun.”
—The Prologue to the “Canterbury Tales” (Dr. Skeat’s edition).
The year 1290 must have been notable in the annals of the Hospital, for
in that year died Eleanor of Castile, the wife of Edward I, at Harby,
near Lincoln, and the King in pious memory built a sculptured cross at
every place where the body of his consort rested during the funeral
procession to Westminster. The last station in this progress was at the
village of Charing. The hospitality of the brethren must have been taxed
to the utmost to provide accommodation for the retinue accompanying the
King, even if supplemented by the exertions of the neighbouring
hermitage of St. Catherine. The cross at Charing was completed in the
year 1294, and the brethren no doubt at this time had many opportunities
of conversing with the artists and handicraftsmen who formed the very
flourishing and remarkable school of art at Westminster, and who were so
enthusiastically encouraged both by Henry III and his son Edward. It is
quite possible that the Chapel of the Convent may have benefited by the
advice, or even by the workmanship of Alexander “the Imaginator,” of
Abingdon, and William de Ireland, whose artistic handiwork formed so
prominent a feature of the Eleanor Crosses.
The next records show that officials with foreign names are in charge of
the estate of Roncesvalles in England. In 1292 William de Cestre and
Peter Arnaldi de Santo Michaele are nominated attorneys for five years
for the Prior then staying beyond seas, and again, the following year,
we find Lupus de Canone concerned in the management of the Roncesvalles
property, having a lay person, Arnaldus de Sancto Johanne, associated
with him.
Evidence of the vigour displayed by Brother Lupus in his administration
of the affairs of the Convent occurs in an entry in the statement of
accounts drawn up by the Executors of Queen Eleanor. It gives the
information that the Executors paid the comparatively large sum of
14_l._ 2_s._ to Brother Lupus, Procurator of the Hospital of
Roncesvalles, as damages claimed by the brethren on account of their
houses at Southampton. This payment was made in the year 1291, and not
only indicates that the estate of Roncesvalles in England was being
watchfully managed, but also gives us the information that the Convent
still possessed the property at Southampton, originally conveyed to them
in the foundation-gift of William Marshall.
The brethren of St. Mary of Roncesvalles at Charing did not fail to
defend their rights when unjust inroads were made on their property.
There are indications that efforts, stimulated no doubt by the Mother
House, were made after periods of lax management—numerous in the
troubled times that followed—to repossess themselves of the rents and
property seized by powerful neighbours. These efforts were in many cases
successful, partly by the good will of charitably disposed persons,
partly by the influence of the Crown, but mainly by the sturdy support
of the rights of their House before the King’s Court.
In the year 1294, the Prior of the Hospital claimed, by writ of entry,
one toft with appurtenances in Westminster from Adam, son of Walter the
Scot. It was admitted that the toft and tenements had been held fifteen
years previously by the Prior, who had lost them by default, as he did
not appear before the Court when the ownership of the property was in
question. The Convent made good its claim, though it seems that Adam was
quite willing to restore the property to the Convent, but a special
inquiry had to be made to show that there was no collusion in permitting
this property to pass in mortmain to the religious house. It is of
interest to note that the Prior, Garcia de Ochoa, died in November,
1278, and was succeeded by the Prior Juan. In the year 1279, when this
property passed by default, difficulties may have arisen on account of
an interregnum at Roncesvalles.
To this period an incident should probably be referred to which
attention is drawn in an undated petition from the Prior, requesting
that property lying before the Cross at Charing, to the extent of 3
acres, and certain rents, should be restored. This property had been
held for a period of ten years by a certain John of Lincoln, Burgess of
London, and on his death had passed into the hands of the King on
account of default on the part of the Attorney of the Prior and Convent.
This petition quaintly recites as part of the evidence that the property
belonged to the Convent, that the fact was a matter of common knowledge,
“come les gentz dil pais le sauont bien et toute la veisinetee.” The
little incident has a strong resemblance to other successful claims for
their lost lands made under the stimulating influence of Brother Lupus.
During the troubled times when England was engaged in Continental wars,
soon to become almost continuous, communication between Gascony and
England must have been so difficult as to be well-nigh impossible to men
of peace. Convoys under military protection were in imminent danger of
capture, and from what we know, especially in the case of naval warfare
at this period, there were few of the vanquished who escaped death. In
addition to the dangers of travelling another source of great difficulty
was felt by the Prior and his officials. The King was in constant and
urgent need of money to permit of the prosecution of his warlike policy,
and his agents were not too scrupulous as to how it was obtained. If it
could be represented that the property of the alien religious houses in
the King’s dominions could be used for the support of his enemies
abroad, or if it could be urged in extenuation that funds sent abroad by
the alien communities could be captured in transit, it is evident that
the King would have many excuses and would exercise little scruple in
levying heavy contributions on the property of the alien clergy in this
country, or even of confiscating it entirely. It was under these
conditions that the earliest suppressions and confiscations of the alien
houses took place.
[Illustration:
FIG. 8.
After an ancient drawing in the Gardner collection. On the left is
part of the south end of the chapel of St. Mary Roncevall; in the
foreground and to the right the gardens of the Convent. In the
distance the river and the buildings of Whitehall and Westminster.
]
In 1321 we have a very suggestive record that William Roberti, Canon of
the Hospital of St. Mary, is appointed Proctor-General in England for
the recovery of their lands and rents. The late Proctor, John de
Roncesvalles, had died, and the Prior in Navarre,[10] not being informed
of the fact, did not appoint a new Proctor, “war and other impediments
hindering them, so that their lands and rents were taken by divers men.”
Immediately following, letters of protection are given to William
Roberti to aid him in his task, “in consideration of the benefits
constantly given in that Hospital to poor pilgrims visiting the shrine
of Santiago.” As the result of this vigorous action the House of St.
Mary Roncesvalles at Charing passed through a period of comparative
prosperity, for so late as 1335 a strong policy still seems to have been
pursued. In that year there is an interesting record of the recovery of
10 acres of land known as “Roncesvalcroft,” in Kensington. It was stated
to have been abandoned by the brethren and was in the occupation of a
certain Simon de Kensyngton. In such matters, however, the King’s agents
were usually very active. Simon de Kensyngton did not long remain in
possession, for the watchful eyes of William Trussel and Walter de
Hungerford, the King’s escheators, were upon him and they claimed the
land for the Crown. The legal argument in this dispute goes on to state
how the land, not being held directly from the Crown, was restored to
the brethren.
Footnote 10:
Andrés Ruiz de Medrano; _ob._ August 21, 1327 (?).
It was in the second quarter of the fourteenth century that the
community of St. Mary of Roncesvalles in this country appears to have
been most prosperous. The Convent at Charing Cross was the headquarters
of the brethren in our islands. The Procurator for the Prior who managed
the estates and collected the revenues had his residence there. The
property they possessed in London was the most valuable, and consisted
of plots of land in various parts of the suburbs, as well as at Charing
Cross, but the Convent also possessed a considerable amount of property
in Canterbury and at Oxford. Evidence remains that they derived revenue
from property in Norwich and that they had possessions elsewhere in
England, in Wales, in Ireland, and in Scotland. The income derived from
these possessions was sufficient to permit of a subsidy towards the
support of the Mother House in the Pyrenees.
At Charing Cross itself the Priory possessed a piece of land fronting on
the river and extending back to the roadway between London and
Westminster. The depth of this plot was then not so great as it is now,
for the waters of the river extended much nearer to Charing Cross than
at present.[11] The position of Inigo Jones’s well-known watergate at
the foot of Buckingham Street, the last relic remaining of York House,
indicates the line of the river bank at a date over two hundred years
subsequent to the time now under consideration.
Footnote 11:
Charing Cross stood approximately on the site now occupied by the
statue of King Charles I.
Occupying the most easterly part of the river frontage was situated the
Church of the Convent. This Church, or Chapel as it was usually called
in London, was built soon after the foundation of the Convent, but there
is evidence that considerable alterations and additions were made much
later, perhaps at the end of the fourteenth, and again during the last
phase of the existence of the house, in the fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries. Some idea of the appearance of the Chapel and the
neighbouring buildings may be gained by studying two ancient drawings
still in existence, made while the conventual buildings were standing.
One of these is the well-known sketch of London by Anthony Van den
Wyngaerde, dating from the middle of the sixteenth century. The other is
a very beautiful sketch in the Gardner collection which shows a portion
of the south-western end of the chapel, the gardens of the Convent, and
in the distance Whitehall and Westminster. Judging by the evidence thus
obtained, the chapel consisted of a rectangular nave, built of stone.
The type of work indicates that it was built about the middle of the
thirteenth century. There appear to have been two storeys in this
building, the lower storey with three large pointed windows, and the
upper storey with three smaller windows also pointed. The upper part,
with the small windows, may have formed the clerestory. It is possible,
however, that the upper part of the church was cut off from the lower
part, and that this upper storey was lighted by the three smaller
windows alluded to. Instances of this arrangement are known to have
occurred in the churches belonging to hospitals. In such cases part of
the church served the purpose of sheltering the sick, while at the
eastern end was the chapel proper, arranged so that the sick should have
the full benefit of the services of the church.
The pitch of the chapel roof was steep, the form most easily constructed
at the period of which we speak, and was no doubt covered with lead. A
belfry was situated at the north-eastern end of the chapel. Certain
buildings of a much later date than the main part of the edifice, and
probably built of brick, are seen to have been added to the northern and
southern ends of the chapel, and along the river front. From a terrace
on the south-east side of the chapel stairs led down to the water’s
edge. Immediately to the west of the chapel were the Convent gardens,
extending in the direction of the roadway to Westminster, and partly
terraced to the river bank. Lying back from the chapel were the
conventual buildings and other tenements in the possession of the
community. These appear to have been arranged on both sides of a court
which opened on the high road close to the cross.
[Illustration:
FIG. 9.
The cross according to the use of Roncesvalles, from a stamp now used
in the “Real Casa.” This ensign “unites in one figure the Cross, the
Crozier, and the Sword.”
]
It is stated that over the doorway of each of these houses was
sculptured a cross, according to the use of Roncesvalles. There also
appears to have been a Latin inscription around or near the doorway of
the chapel indicating the date of an addition or restoration in the time
of Henry IV. The exact position occupied by the Hospital itself cannot
be now identified unless, as is very probable, the chapel itself did
duty both as a church and a hospital. The churchyard of the community
was probably situated in the lands to the south-west of the conventual
buildings. The situation of the chapel corresponds approximately to the
middle section of Charing Cross Railway Station in alignment with York
Gate and extending towards the land now occupied by Craven Street and
Northumberland Avenue.