At the end of his edition of the “Liber niger Scaccarii,” London,

1771, vol. i. pp. 470*-478*, Hearne printed a series of curious

Letters Patent relating to London Bridge. That of John, commending

Isembert to the city, is given above (Appendix I.). There follow, an

order of John applying the tax paid by foreign merchants established

in London to the support of the bridge (Close Roll, 15 John, m. 3); a

patent of Henry III addressed “to the brothers and chaplains of the

chapel of St. Thomas on London Bridge, and to the other {428} persons

living on the same bridge,” to inform them that the convent of St.

Catherine’s Hospital, near the Tower, would receive the revenues and

would take charge of the repairs of the bridge for five years (Patent

50 Hen. III m. 43, No. 129); grant of the same revenues and charge

to the queen for six years (54 Hen. III m. 4, No. 11); patent of

Edward I (January, 1281), ordering a general collection throughout

the kingdom to ward off the danger resulting from the bad condition

of the edifice (9 Ed. I m. 27); patent of the same king ordering the

levy of an extraordinary tax on account of the catastrophe which,

after all, had happened.

“Rex majori suo London’ salutem. Propter subitam ruinam pontis

London’ vobis mandamus quod associatis vobis duobus vel tribus de

discretioribus et legalioribus civibus civitatis prædictæ, capiatis

usque ad parliamentum nostrum post Pasch’ prox’ futur’, in subsidium

reparationis pontis predicti, consuetudinem subscriptam, videlicet,

de quolibet homine transeunte aquam Thamisiæ ex transverso ex utraque

parte pontis London’ de London’ usque Suthwerk et de Suthwerk usque

London’, occasione defectus reparationis pontis predicti, unum

quadrantem, de quolibet equo sic transeunte ibidem unum denarium, et

de quolibet summagio sic ibidem transeunte unum obolum. Set volumus

quod aliquid ibidem hac occasione interim capiatur nisi in subsidium

reparationis pontis supra dicti. In cujus, etc. Teste rege apud

Cirencestr’, iiijº die Februarij” (10 E. I m. 18).

The same year, on 6th July, the king prolonged the term during

which this exceptional tax should be levied to three years (p.

476*); he also, “understanding that it would hurt neither himself

nor the city,” granted to the mayor and commonalty of London three

empty spaces, one near the wall of the churchyard “de Wolchurch,”

the two others near the wall of St. Paul’s churchyard, for them to

build thereon and let the buildings for the benefit of the bridge

(10 Ed. I m. 11). Then, in the thirty-fourth year of his reign,

Edward I established a detailed tariff of the tolls which all

merchandise passing under or over the bridge should pay during the

next three years (34 Ed. I m. 25). Even this was not enough, as we

find Edward II asking all the archbishops, bishops, rectors and

other ecclesiastical authorities of the kingdom to well receive the

wardens of London Bridge or their delegates and allow them to piously

persuade the people to make offerings for the repair of the bridge:

“Eos populum ibidem piis suasionibus excitare et suarum elemosinarum

subsidia ad reparationem Pontis predicti caritative invocare

permittatis.” (14 Ed. II pt. i. m. 19, p. 477*). {429}

IV

(p. 65)

INQUESTS RELATING TO THE MAINTENANCE OF BRIDGES

A great many examples of these inquests may be found in the

collection published by the Record Commission, “Placitorum in domo

capitulari Westmonasteriensi asservatorum abbreviatio,” London, 1811,

fol. Here are references to some of the more interesting ones:

Case where an abbot is explicitly obliged, as one of the conditions

of his tenure, to repair a bridge, p. 205; 11 and 12 Ed. I.

Agreement between the abbot of Croyland and the prior of Spalding for

the construction of several bridges, p. 205; 12 Ed. I.

Discussion as to the building of a bridge at Chester, p. 209; 13 Ed.

I.

Refusal by the abbot of Coggeshall to repair a bridge: “Per

juratores, Abbas de Coggeshale non tenetur reparare pontem de

Stratford inter Branketre et Coggeshale, eo quod de tempore memorie

non fuit ibidem alius pons quam quedam planchea de borde super quam

omnes transeuntes salvo et secure transire potuerunt,” p. 303; 1 Ed.

II.

Measures taken to constrain the inhabitants of two towns to repair

the bridges of a highway in their neighbourhood: “Distringantur

villate de Aswardeby et Skredington ad reparandum pontes in pupplica

strata inter Lafford et ecclesiam de Stowe juxta inquisicionem inde

captam anno lvi. Henrici iij. coram Gilberto de Preston et sociis

suis in comitatu Lincolniensi itinerantibus, per breve ejusdem

regis,” p. 305; 2 Ed. II.

Finding out of the person who is to repair Chesford bridge, p. 314; 6

Ed. II.

Refusal of the abbot of Fountains to repair Bradeley bridge, p. 318;

7 Ed. II.

Hamo de Morston’s case, p. 328; 11 Ed. II, referred to above, p. 64.

Repair of the bridges of Exhorne, Hedecrone, and Hekinby, in the

county of Kent, p. 339; 15 Ed. II.

Inquest as to Claypole bridge. It is found that the inhabitants

of Claypole are bound to repair it: “Ideo preceptum est vicecomiti

Lincolniensi quod distringat homines predicte ville de Claypole ad

reparandum et sustentandum pontem predictum in forma predicta,” p.

350; 18 Ed. II, etc. {430}

V

(p. 92)

THE KING’S JOURNEYS-PETITIONS AND STATUTES CONCERNING THE ROYAL

PURVEYORS

“Nullus vicecomes vel ballivus noster vel aliquis alius capiat equos

vel carettas alicujus pro cariagio faciendo, nisi reddat liberationem

antiquitus statutam; scilicet pro caretta ad duos equos decem

denarios per diem, et pro caretta ad tres equos quatuordecim denarios

perdiem.” Magna Charta, first confirmation by Henry III, art. 23,

A.D. 1216. “Statutes of the Realm,” 1810, vol. i. p. 15. This article

is found in successive confirmations of the great charter; the germ

of it was contained in John’s original text, of 1215, art. 30.

“Item pur ceo qe le poeple ad esté moult grevé de ceo qe les bledz,

feyns, bestaill, et autre manère de vitailles et biens des gentz

de mesme le poeple, ont esté pris, einz ces houres . . . dont nul

paiement ad esté fait, . . .” etc. Preamble to the statute 4 Ed. III,

ch. iii. “Statutes of the Realm,” A.D. 1330. See also statute 36 Ed.

III, ch. ii.

Petition of the Commons, 25 Ed. III, 1351–52 (“Rolls of Parliament,”

vol. ii. p. 242): “Item prie la commune qe là où avant ces heures les

botillers nostre seigneur le roi et lour deputez soleient prendre

moult plus de vyns à l’oeps le roi qe mestier ne fust; desqueux ils

mettont les plus febles à l’oeps le roi et les meliours à lour celers

demesnes à vendre, et le remenant relessont à eux desqueux ils les

pristerent, pur grantz fyns à eux faire pur chescun tonel, à grant

damage et empoverissement des marchantz. . . .”

The inhabitants of the counties of Dorset and Somerset complain in

the same way that the sheriff of these counties had taken of them

“cynk centz quarters de furment et trois centz bacouns, à l’oeps

le roi, come il dist, et il ne voillast pur sa graunt meistrie et

seigneurie allower pur vintz quarteres fors qe pur sesse quarters,

et c’est assaver bussell de dit blee fors que dis deniers, là où

il vendist après pur xv deniers. Par quey vos liges gentz sount

grauntement endamagé et vous, chier seigneur, n’estes servy des

blées et des bacounes avauntditz. . . .” 4 Ed. III, 1331, “Rolls of

Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 40.

Petition of the Commons to the Good Parliament of 1376: {431} “Item

prie la commune qe come le roi de temps passé et ses progenitours,

nobles princes, soleient avoir lour cariage, c’est assaver chivalx,

charietz et charettes pur servir leur hostiel: et ore les purveours

de l’hostel nostre dit seigneur le roi pur défaut de sa propre

cariage et de bone governance prenont chivalx, charietz et charettes

des povres communes, la environ par x leukes où le roi tient son

hostel, si bien des gentz de loigne pays par xxiiii leukes ou lx

passantz par la chymyne come des gentz demurrantz en mesme le pays,

en grande arrerissement et poverisement des dites communes. . . .”

“Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 351.

Complaint of the clergy at being subjected to the exactions of

the purveyors (1376): “Item provisores et ministri regis pro

provisionibus regiis faciendis feodum et loca ecclesiastica, invitis

viris ecclesiasticis seu eorum custodibus non intrent, nec animalia

aliaque res et bona inde auferant, prout fecerint et faciunt nunc

indies, contra ecclesiasticam libertatem et constitutiones sanctorum

patrum et statuta regni edita in hac parte. Nec in via extra feoda et

loca predicta predictorum virorum cariagium carectasve capiant vel

arrestent.

“_Resp._ Le roi le voet.”

“Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 358.

VI

(p. 112)

THE RECURRENCE OF LEET-DAYS AND VISITS OF JUSTICES

The Commons petition as follows the Good Parliament of 1376: “Item où

de ancien temps ad esté custume qe les presentours dussent presenter

les articles du lete et de vewe de frank plegg tan soulement deux

foitz par an, . . . les baillifs avaunt ditz fount les povres gentz

et les husbandes de pais, qeux dussent travailer en leur labours et

husbandriez et pur le commune profit, venir de trois semaignes en

trois à lour wapentachez et hundredez, par colour de presentement

avoir, et rettent leur labours et leur husbanderiez au terre, sinoun

q’ils leur veullent doner tiels ransons et fyns q’ils ne purront

sustener ne endurer. . . .

“_Resp._ Il y ad estatutz suffisamment.”

“Rolls of Parliament,” 50 Ed. III, vol. ii. p. 357.

Again, the Commons having pointed out that the visits of the {432}

justices in eyre are a very great cause of trouble and expense to

the people in time of war, the king suppresses the visits of those

magistrates while the war lasts, except when any “horrible” case may

occur.

“Item priont les communes au roi leur seigneur q’il ne grante en

nulle partie de roialme eire ne trailbaston durante la guerre, par

queux les communes purront estre troblez ne empoveres, fors qe en

horible cas.

“_Resp._ Le roi le voet.”

“Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 305, 45 Ed. III, 1371.

VII

(p. 115)

THE DRESS OF THE WORLDLY MONK

According to the Council of London (1342): “. . . Militari potius

quam clericali habitu induti superiori, scilicet brevi seu stricto,

notabiliter tamen et excessive latis, vel longis manicis, cubitos non

tegentibus [tangentibus in Labbe] sed pendulis, _crinibus cum_ [two

words not in Labbe] furrura vel sandalo revolutis, et ut vulgariter

dicitur, reversatis, et caputiis cum tipettis miræ longitudinis,

barbisque prolixis incedere, et suis digitis annulos indifferenter

portare publice, ac zonis stipatis pretiosis miræ magnitudinis

supercingi, et bursis cum imaginibus variis sculptis, amellatis

[annellatis, L.] et deauratis, ad ipsas patenter cum cultellis,

ad modum gladiorum pendentibus, caligis etiam rubeis, scaccatis

et viridibus, sotularibusque rostratis et incisis multimode, ac

croperiis [propriis, L.] ad sellas, et cornibus ad colla pendentibus,

epitogiis aut _clocis_ [this word not in L.] furratis, uti patenter

ad oram, contra sanctiones canonicas temere non verentur, adeo quod a

laicis vix aut nulla patet distinctio clericorum.” Wilkins’ “Concilia

Magnæ Britanniæ,” London, 1737, vol. ii. p. 703; also in Labbe,

“Sacrosancta Concilia,” year 1342, vol. xxv. col. 1170.

According to the Council of York (1367): “Nonnulli . . . vestes

publice deferre præsumpserunt deformiter decurtatas, medium tibiarum

suarum, seu genua nullatenus attingentes . . . ad jactantiam et

suorum corporum ostentationem.” Labbe, ibid. vol. xxvi. col. 467–8.

{433}

VIII

(p. 120)

EXACTIONS OF CERTAIN NOBLEMEN WHEN TRAVELLING

Petitions of the Commons, “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. i. p. 290 (8 Ed

II), A.D. 1314: “Item par là où asquns grantz seignurs de la terre

passent parmi le pays, ils entrent en maners et lieus de Seint Eglise

et des autres, et pernent saunz congé le seignur et les baillifs

gardeyns de meisme les leus, et encontre lour volunté, ceo q’il

voillent saunz rien paer encontre la lei et les ordenaunces, non pas

eaunz regard à l’escomenge (excommunication) doné encontre tutz tels.

Et si homme les devi rien, debrisent les eus par force, et pernent et

emportent ceo qe beal lour est, et batent les ministres et destruent

les biens, plus qe il ne covendreit, et autres grevouses depiz

ultrages fount.

“Item il prenent charettes et chivaux de fair lour cariages à lour

voluntez saunz rien paer et des queux nientefoitz james n’est faite

restoraunce à ceux qi les devient; ne il n’osent suire ne pleindre

pur le poair de diz seignur qar s’il le facent ils sont honiz ou en

corps ou en chateux; par quoi ladite comuneauté prie qe remedie soit

fait en tels ultrages.”

IX

(p. 130)

PASSAGE OF THE HUMBER IN A FERRY

“Ad peticionem hominum de Estriding petenc’ remedium super nimia

solucione exacta ad passagium de Humbr’ ultra solitum modum.”

The king directs the opening of an inquest, with power to the

commissioners to re-establish things in their prestine condition.

“Rolls of Parliament,” i. p. 202, 35 Ed. I, 1306.

Another petition under Edward II: “A nostre seigneur le [roi] et à

son consail se pleint la comunauté de sa terre qe par là où homme

soleit passer Humbre entre Hesel et Barton, homme à chival pour

dener, homme à pée pur une maele, qe ore sunt il, par extorsion,

mis à duble; et de ceo priunt remedi pur Dieu.” The king, in reply,

orders that the masters of the ferry shall not take more than

formerly: “vel quod significent causam quare id facere noluerint.”

Ibid., p. 291; 8 Ed. II, 1314–5. {434}

X

(pp. 165 and 171)

THE RIGHT OF SANCTUARY

Examples of entries in the Durham sanctuary register: “Memorandum

quod vj die mensis octobris, Aº Dⁱ M. CCCC LXX VIIº Willielmus Rome

et Willielmus Nicholson parochiæ de Forsate, convolarunt ad ecclesiam

cath. Sancti Cuthberti Dunelm., ubi inter cætera pro feloniâ per

eosdem commissâ et publice confessatâ, in, de, et pro occisione

Willielmi Aliand, per eosdem antea occisi, pecierunt a venerabilibus

et religiosis viris dominis Thomâ Haughton sacristâ ipsius

ecclesiæ et Willielmo Cuthbert magistro Galileæ ibidem, fratribus

et commonachis ejusdem ecclesiæ, immunitatem ecclesiæ, juxta

libertates et privilegia gloriosissimo confessori Sancto Cuthberto

antiquitus concessa, favorabiliter eis concedi, et per pulsacionem

unius campanæ, ut est moris, favorabiliter obtinuerunt. Ibidem

præsentibus, videntibus et audientibus, discretis viris Willielmo

Heghyngton, Thomâ Hudson, Johanne Wrangham, et Thomâ Strynger,

testibus ad præmissa vocatis specialiter et requisitis.” “Sanctuarium

Dunelmense,” ed. J. Raine, Surtees Society; London, 1827, No. V.

On the question of sanctuaries the councils are explicit: “Firmiter

prohibemus ne quis fugientes ad ecclesiam, quos ecclesia debet tueri,

inde violenter abstrahat, aut ipsos circa ecclesiam obsideat, vel

eisdem substrahat victualia.” Concilium provinciale Scoticanum, A.D.

1225, in Wilkins’ “Concilia Magnæ Britanniæ,” London, 1737, vol. i.

p. 616.

As shown by the reports of cases in the Year Books, good care was

to be taken by the refugee to flee to a church duly “dedicated by a

bishop.” Here is a case of the time of Edward I:—

“Quid[a]m captus fuit pro latrocinio, et ductus coram justiciariis

et inculpatus, dixit: Domine, ego fui in ecclesia de N. et dehinc

vi abstractus, unde imprimis peto juris beneficium quod mittar

retro unde ibi fui vi abstractus.—_Justiciarius._ Nos dicimus quod

ecclesia illa nunquam fuit dedicata per episcopum.—Priso. Sic,

domine.—_Justiciarius._ Inquiratur per duodecim:—Qui dixerunt quod

illa ecclesia nunquam fuit dedicata per episcopum.—_Justiciarius._

Modo oportet te respondere.—_Priso._ Sum bonus et fidelis: ideo de

bono et malo pono, etc. (formula of submission to the decision of a

jury, _patria_).—Duodecim nominati exiverunt ad deliberandos {435}

(_sic_).” “Year Books,” edited by A. Horwood, 1863, vol. i. p. 541,

Rolls Series. The final result is not given. The Year Books not

infrequently give accounts of cases where the right of sanctuary is

invoked by mere thieves as ready as any to avail themselves of the

privilege.

The abuses resulting from the right of sanctuary, especially with

reference to St. Martin’s le Grand in London, are described as

follows in one of the Commons’ petitions: “Item prient les communes,

coment diverses persones des diverses estatz, et auxi apprentices

et servantz des plusours gentz, si bien demurrantz en la citée de

Loundres et en les suburbes d’icell, come autres gentz du roialme al

dite citée repairantz, ascuns en absence de lour meistres, de jour

en autre s’enfuyent ove les biens et chatelx de lour ditz mestres à

le collège de Seint Martyn le Grant en Loundres, à l’entent de et

sur mesmes les biens et chateux illeoqes vivre à lour voluntée saunz

duresse ou exécution du ley temporale sur eux illeoqes ent estre

faite, et là sont ils resceux et herbergéez, et mesmes les biens

et chateux par les ministres du dit collège al foitz seiséez et

pris come forffaitz à le dit collège. Et auxi diverses dettours as

plusours marchantz, si bien du dite citée, come d’autres vaillantz du

roialme, s’enfuyent de jour en autre al dit collège ove lour avoir à

y demurrer à l’entent avaunt dit. Et ensement plusours persones au

dit collège fuéez et là demurrantz, pur lour faux lucre, forgent,

fount et escrivent obligations, endentures, acquitances, et autres

munimentz fauxes, et illeoqes les enseallent es nouns si bien de

plusours marchantz et gentz en en la dite citée demurantz, come

d’autres du dit roialme à lour disheriteson et final destruction.

. . . Et en quelle collège de temps en temps sount receptz murdres,

traitours, come tonsours du monoye del coigne le Roy, larons,

robbours et autres diverses felouns malfaisours et destourbours de

la pées nostre seignur le roy, par jour tapisantz et de noet issantz

pur faire lour murdres, tresons, larcines, robbories et félonies.

. . . Et après tieuz murdres, tresons, etc., faitz, al dit collège

repairent.” “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. iii. p. 503, A.D. 1402.

XI

(p. 211)

A MONOPOLY OF MINSTRELSY FOR THE KING’S (EDWARD IV) OWN MINSTRELS

“_Pro Fraternitate Ministrallorum Regis_” (Rymer, “Fœdera,” 24,

1469). “Rex (etc.) . . . Sciatis quod ex querelosa insinuatione

{436} dilectorum nobis Walteri Haliday, marescalli, Johannis Cliff

(and six others) ministrallorum nostrorum accepimus qualiter

nonnulli, rudes agricolæ et artifices diversarum misterarum Regni

nostri Angliæ, finxerunt se fore ministrallos, quorum aliqui

liberatam nostram eis minime datam portarent, seipsos etiam fingentes

esse ministrallos nostros proprios, cujus quidem liberatæ ac dictæ

artis sive occupationis ministrallorum colore, in diversis partibus

regni nostri prædicti, grandes pecuniarum exactiones de ligeis

nostris deceptive colligunt et recipiunt, et licet ipsi in arte vel

sive occupatione illa minime intelligentes sive experti existant, et

in diversis artibus et operationibus diebus ferialibus sive profestis

utuntur et victum suum inde sufficienter percipiant, de loco tamen

ad locum, in diebus festivalibus, discurrunt, et proficua ilia

totaliter percipiunt, e quibus ministralli nostri prædicti, et cæteri

ministralli nostri pro tempore existentes, in arte sive occupatione

prædicta sufficienter eruditi et instructi, nullisque aliis

laboribus, occupationibus sive misteris utentes, vivere deberent.”

For which cause, permission has been granted: “Ministrallis nostris

quod ipsi, ad laudem et honorem Dei et ut specialius exorare

teneantur pro salubri statu nostro et præcarissimæ consortis nostræ

Elizabethæ reginæ Angliæ, dum agimus in humanis et pro animabus

nostris cum ab hac luce migraverimus, necnon pro anima carissimi

domini et patris nostri . . . tam in capella Beatæ Mariæ Virginis

infra ecclesiam cathedralem sancti Pauli Londoniæ, quam in libera

capella nostra regia sancti Anthonii, in eadem civitate nostra

Londoniæ, quandam fraternitatem sive gildam (quam ut accepimus

fratres et sorores fraternitatis ministrallorum regni nostri

prædicti, retroactis temporibus inierunt. . . .) stabilire,

continuare et augmentare ac quascumque personas, tam homines

quam mulieres eis grato animo adhærentes, in fratres et sorores

fraternitatis sive gildæ prædictæ recipere . . . possint et valeant.”

And for the good of the reconstituted gild, “volumus . . . quod

nullus ministrallus regni nostri prædicti, quamvis in hujusmodi arte

sive occupatione sufficienter eruditus existat, eadem arte . . . de

cætero, nisi de fraternitate sive gilda prædicta sit et ad eandam

admissus fuerit et cum cæteris confratribus ejusdem contribuent

aliquo modo utatur.”

The beneficiaries of his monopoly will have a right to inquire

throughout the realm, “de omnibus et singulis hujusmodi personis

fingentibus se fore ministrallos,” and to impose fines to be used

“pro continua et perpetua sustentatione certarum candelarum cerearum

vulganter nuncupatarum _tapers_,” in the before-mentioned chapels.

{437}

XII

(p. 213)

POPULAR ENGLISH SONGS OF THE MIDDLE AGES

The following collections may be consulted:

“Ancient Songs and Ballads from the reign of Henry II to the

Revolution,” collected by John Ritson, revised edition by W. C.

Hazlitt, London, 1877.

“Political Songs of England from the reign of John to that of Edward

II,” edited by Thomas Wright; Camden Society, London, 1839.

“Specimens of Lyric Poetry composed in England in the reign of

Edward I,” ed. Th. Wright, Percy Society, 1842.

“Reliquiæ antiquæ, scraps from ancient MSS. illustrating chiefly

early English literature,” ed. Th. Wright and J. O. Halliwell, 2

vols.

“Songs and Carols now first printed from a MS. of the xvth Century,”

edited by Thomas Wright; Percy Society, London, 1847.

“Political Poems and Songs, from Edward III to Richard III,” edited

by Thomas Wright; Rolls Series, London, 1859, 1861.

“Political, Religious, and Love Poems,” edited by F. J. Furnivall;

Early English Text Society, London, 1866.

“Catalogue of MS. Romances in the British Museum,” by Henry L. D.

Ward, vol. i., London, 1887. See as to Robin Hood ballads, pp.

516–23.

“Bishop Percy’s folio MS.—Ballads and Romances,” edited by J. W.

Hales and F. J. Furnivall, Ballad Society, London, 1867.

“The English and Scottish popular Ballads,” edited by Prof. F. J.

Child, Boston, U.S.A., 1882, ff.

Many satirical songs are to be found in those collections on the

vices of the times, the exaggerations of fashion, the ill government

of the king, the Lollards, the friars, the women, with some songs in

a higher key urging the king to defend the national honour and to

make war. See for example Dr. Furnivall’s collection, p. 4. In this

work is printed the song referred to in our text on the death of the

Duke of Suffolk (pp. 6–11): {438}

_Here folowythe a Dyrge made by the comons of Kent in the tyme of

ther rysynge, when Jake Cade was theyr cappitayn_:

* * * * *

Who shall execute y^e fest of solempnite?

Bysshoppis and lords, as gret reson is.

Monkes, chanons, and prestis, withall y^e clergy,

Prayeth for hym that he may com to blys.

And that nevar such anothar come aftar this

His intersectures, blessid mot they be,

And graunt them to reygne with aungellis!

For Jake Napys sowle, placebo and dirige.

“Placebo,” begyneth the bisshop of Hereforthe;

“Dilexi,” quod y^e bisshop of Chester.

XIII

(p. 314)

INDULGENCES AND THE THEORY OF THE “TREASURY” ACCORDING TO POPE

CLEMENT VI

“Quantum ergo exinde ut nec supervacua, inanis aut superflua tantæ

effusionis miseratio redderetur, thesaurum militanti Ecclesiæ

acquisivit, volens suis thesaurizare filiis pius pater, ut sic

sit infinitus thesaurus hominibus, quo qui usi sunt, Dei amicitiæ

participes sunt effecti. Quem quidem thesaurum non in ærario

repositum, non in agro absconditum, sed per beatum Petrum cœli

clavigerum, ejusque successores, suos in terris vicarios commisit

fidelibus salubriter dispensandum, et propriis et rationabilibus

causis, nunc pro totali, nunc pro partiali remissione pœnæ temporalis

pro peccatis debitæ tam generaliter quam specialiter (prout cum Deo

expedire cognoscerent) vere pœnitentibus et confessis misericorditer

applicandum. Ad cujus quidem thesauri cumulum, beatæ Dei genetricis,

omnium electorum a primo justo usque ad ultimum merita adminiculum

præstare noscuntur, de cujus consumptione, seu minutione non est

aliquatenus formidandum, tam propter infinita Christi (ut prædictum

est) merita, quam pro eo quod quanto plures ex ejus applicatione

trahuntur ad justitiam, tanto magis accrescit ipsorum cumulus

meritorum.”

“Dictionnaire dogmatique, historique, ascétique et pratique des

indulgences,” by Abbé P. Jouhanneaud, Paris, 1852, pp. 123–4, being

vol. xxvii. of Migne’s “Nouvelle encyclopédie théologique.” {439}

XIV

(p. 321)

SERMON ACCOMPANYING THE DISPLAY OF A PAPAL BULL (ON THE OCCASION OF

THE COMING OF HENRY OF LANCASTER)

“‘Mes bonnes gens, entendez tous ici.

Vous savez bien coment le roy banny

A, à grant tort, vostre seigneur Henry,

Et sans raison;

Et pource j’ay fait impetracion

Au saint père, qui est nostre patron,

Que trestous ceulx auront rémission

De leurs péchiez

De quoy oncques ilz furent entachiez,

De puis l’eure qu’ilz furent baptisiez,

Qui leur aideront tous certains en suez

Celle journée;

Et vesenci la bulle seellée,

Que le pappe de romme la louée

M’a envoié, et pour vous tous donnée,

Mes bons amis.

Vueilliez lui donc aidier ses ennemis

A conquerre, et vous en serez mis

Avecques ceux qui sont en paradis

Après la mort.’

Lors veissiez jeune, viel, feble, et fort

Murmure faire, et par commun accort,

Sans regarder ni le droit ni le tort,

Eulx émouvoir,

Cuidant que ce c’on leur fist assavoir

Feust vérité, tous le courent de voir;

Car de sens n’ont guères ne de savoir,

De telz y a.

L’arcevesque ce conseil cy trouva.”

“French metrical history of the deposition of King Richard II,”

by Créton, edited and translated into English by Rev. J. Webb.

“Archæologia,” t. xx. p. 310.

This speech is attributed by the chronicler to Thomas Arundel, {440}

Archbishop of Canterbury, and is supposed to have been delivered at

the time of the landing of Henry of Lancaster in 1399 (Henry IV).

XV

(pp. 324, 327, 337)

ECCLESIASTICAL DOCUMENTS CONCERNING CHIEFLY ENGLISH PARDONERS

Richard de Bury on the Pardoners, A.D. 1340:

“Cum sit statutum in canone ne qui eleemosynarum quæstores ad

prædicandum aut indulgentias clero et populo insinuandum sine

literis dioecesanis aut apostolicis admittantur, literæque

apostolicæ quæstoribus hujusmodi concessæ ante admissionem eorum per

diocesanos examinari debeant diligenter: ex gravi tamen multorum

querela ad nostrum pervenit auditum, quod nonnulli ex hujusmodi

quæstoribus, non sine multa temeritatis audacia, motu suo proprio,

in animarum subditorum nostrorum periculum et jurisdictionis nostræ

elusionem manifestam, indulgentias populo concedunt, super votis

dispensant, et perjuriis, homicidiis, usuris et peccatis aliis, sibi

confitentes absolvunt, et male ablata, data sibi aliqua pecuniæ

quantitate, remittunt, ac alias abusiones quamplurimas faciunt et

exponunt, vobis in virtute obedientiæ, firmiter inhibemus et per vos

omnibus rectoribus, vicariis et capellariis parochialibus, vestri

archidiaconatus, inhiberi volumus et mandamus, ne aliqui quæstores

hujusmodi, cujuscumque extiterint conditionis, ad prædicandum aut

indulgentias aliquas insinuandum clero et populo in ecclesiis

parochialibus ac locis aliis vestri archidiaconatus memorati, absque

literis nostris et licentia speciali de cætero admittantur; pecuniam

etiam et res quascumque, per hujusmodi quæstores, aut ad eorum

instantiam collectas . . . indilate faciatis sequestrari. . . . Datum

in manerio nostro de la Welehall’ octavo die mensis Decembris, Aº Dⁱ

mºcccºxlº et consecrationis nostræ vii^{mo}.”

“Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense,” edited by T. D. Hardy, vol. iii. p.

325.

Provincial Synod of Dublin, 1348:

“Cap. xxii. _De quæstoribus._ Item, quia eleemosynarum quæstores

nonnullas abusiones in suis prædicationibus proponunt, ut decipiant

simplices tantum, et nonnulla alia bona subtili vel fallaci {441}

potius ingenio extorqueant, nonnulla etiam mala in deceptionem

animarum multiplicem perpetrentur; statuimus et ordinamus, quod

nullus amodo quæstor sine literis archiepiscopi vel dioec. admittatur

quovismodo. . . . Sacerdotes vero qui alio modo quam supra dicto,

quæstores ad prædicandum voluntarie et scienter admittunt, per

annum a celebratione divinorum ipso facto sint suspensi; et ipsi

quæstores, si contra præmissa aliquid attentaverint, ipso facto

sint excommunicati. Et si per quadraginta dies perseveraverint, ad

significationem episcoporum capiantur et incarcerentur, quousque de

talibus aliud fuerit per loci dioecesanum dispositum. Quascunque

literas hujusmodi quæstoribus hactenus concessas revocamus,

præmissarum sententiarum relaxatione sine absolutione loci dioecesani

reservata. Et capellani pecuniam ea occasione receptam ecclesiis

cathedralibus restituant triplicatam.”

Wilkins, “Concilia,” 1737, vol. ii. p. 750.

Bull of Pope Urban V, “contra quæstores hospitalis Jerusalem in

Anglia,” 1369:

“Urbanus . . . archiepiscopo Cant. ejusque suffraganeis, salutem.

. . . Nuper dilectis filiis Johanne Sancti Dunstani West., Ricardo

B. Mariæ Wolnoth, rectoribus, et Philippo de Braunton, ac Willelmo

de Eya, perpetuis vicariis parochialibus ecclesiarum London. Exon.

et Norwicen. dioec. ac nonnullis aliis rectoribus . . . nobis

referentibus percepimus, quod quæstores priorum, præceptorum et

confratrum domorum hospitalis S. Johannis Jerusalemitani in Anglia,

de voluntate, conniventia, ratihabitione, seu mandato dictorum

priorum . . . in pluribus contra juris et rationis metas impudenter

excedunt. . . . nonnulli tamen quæstores priorum et confratrum

prædictorum, gratia quæstus hujusmodi . . . ad rectorum et vicariorum

hujusmodi ecclesias accedentes, et se ad prædicandum seu exponendum

populo hujusmodi negotia quæstuaria offerentes, licet congrue et

legitime requisiti, literas sedis apostolicæ vel dioecesani loci

eisdem rectoribus seu vicariis sic requirentibus, ostendere seu

exhibere penitus non curarunt neque curant; quin verius de voluntate,

conniventia seu mandato de quibus prædicitur, denegarunt expresse

contra constitutiones canonicas . . . prætendentes ipsos priores

et fratres pro se et eorum quæstoribus in ea parte fore notorie

privilegiatos, licet hoc neque notorium fuerit neque verum; et ut

quadam astutia colorata ipsos rectores, et vicarios exhibitionem

literarum hujusmodi sic petentes, acrius fatigent laboribus et

expensis, ipsos eo quod exhibitionem literarum hujusmodi sic

{442} deposcebant et deposcunt, tanquam injuriatores contra eorum

privilegia manifestos, et quæstuum suorum impeditores proclamarunt

et proclamant, ipsosque ea occasione coram eorum conservatoribus

seu subconservatoribus ad loca diversa et quandoque valde remota

fecerunt et faciunt ad judicium evocari, et per conservatores sive

subconservatores hujusmodi contra eosdem processus indebitos fieri,

eosque nonnunquam excommunicari, aggravari et denunciari licet

de facto, ac alia eis gravamina quamplura inferri procurarunt et

procurant, in ipsorum rectorum et vicariorum grave præjudicium et

scandalum plurimorum: et insuper quæstores prædicti frequenter et

potissime, quando satagunt alicui rectori seu vicario nocere, ad

ipsius rectoris seu vicarii ecclesiam in aliquo die festo, præcipue

quando populus solitus est offerre, accedunt, et ibidem quæstuare,

seu nomina fratriæ seu fraternitatis suæ legere incipiunt et

continuant usque ad talem illius diei festi horam, qua missa ibidem

pro illo die convenienter non potest celebrari; sicque rectores et

vicarios hujusmodi suis faciunt oblationibus, quæ eis in missis

hujusmodi obveniunt, nequiter defraudari. Insuper in ecclesiis et

locis ad eos seu dictum hospitale nullatenus pertinentibus, licet

publice interdictis seu pollutis divina faciant etiam publice

celebrari, et in eis pro eorum libito per se et alios sepeliunt

corpora defunctorum; officium quoque seu negotium quæstuandi

personis simplicibus et quasi illiteratis committunt, qui simplices

aliis simplicibus erroneum præstantes ducatum, generaliter, ut de

spiritualibus taceamus, in populo diffundunt errores.”

Wilkins, “Concilia,” London, 1737, vol. iii. p. 83.

Letter of Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 1378:

“Simon, etc., dilecto filio commissario nostro Cantuar. generali,

salutem, etc. Ad nostrum audientiam est perlatum, quod licet

eleemosynarum quæstores, nisi apostolicas vel dioecesani episcopi

literas exhibuerint, admitti non debeant, vel permitti indulgentias

sibi concessas insinuare, et populo prædicare; nonnulli tamen

quæstores, qui non sine multa temeritatis audacia, et deceptione

multiplici animarum, ac elusione populi christiani, indulgentias

remissionesque falsas et frivolas, et alia erronea . . . prædicant

abusive, tam per vos, quam per official. archidiaconi nostri Cantuar.

de diebus in dies indifferenter illicite admittuntur, nos, abusus

hujusmodi omnimodo abolere volentes, vobis . . . inhibemus et per

vos dicto officiali ac omnibus aliis nobis subditis . . . inhiberi

volumus et mandamus ne quæstores hujusmodi absque nostris literis

{443} sufficientibus in hac parte, ac vobis et ipsis liquere possit

literas apostolicas quæstorum hujusmodi si quas habent, per nos

examinatas primitus extitisse, admittatis ibidem de cætero vel

admittant.”

Wilkins, “Concilia,” vol. iii. p. 131.

Bull of Pope Boniface IX, A.D. 1390:

“Ad audientiam nostram, non sine magna mentis displicentia

fidedignorum quamplurimum relatio perduxit quod quidam religiosi

diversorum etiam mendicantium ordinum et nonnulli clerici sæculares

etiam in dignitatibus constituti, asserentes se a nobis aut a

diversis legatis seu nuntiis sedis apostolicæ missos, et ad plura

peragenda negotia diversas facultates habere per partes, in quibus

es pro nobis et Ecclesia Romana thesaurarius deputatus, discurrunt,

et veras vel prætensas, quas se habere dicunt, facultates fideli

et simplici populo nunciant et irreverenter veris hujusmodi

facultatibus abutentes, suas fimbrias, ut vel sic turpem et infamem

quæstum faciant, impudenter dilatant, et non veras et prætensas

facultates hujusmodi mendaciter simulant, cum etiam pro qualibet

parva pecuniarum summula, non pœnitentes, sed mala conscientia

satagentes iniquitati suæ, quoddam mentitæ absolutionis velamen

prætendere, ab atrocibus delictis, nulla vera contritione, nullaque

debita præcedenti forma (ut verbis illorum utamur) absolvant; male

ablata, certa et incerta, nulla satisfactione prævia (quod omnibus

sæculis absurdissimum est) remittant; castitatis, abstinentiæ,

peregrinationis ultramarinæ, seu beatorum Petri et Pauli de urbe

aut Jacobi in Compostella apostolorum, et alia quævis vota, levi

compensatione commutent; de hæresi vel schismate nominatim aut

incidenter condemnatos, absque eo quod in debita forma abjurent

et quantum possunt debite satisfaciant, non tantum absolvant, sed

in integrum restituant; cum illegitime genitis, ut ad ordines et

beneficia promoveri possint, et intra gradus prohibitos copulatis

aut copulandis dispensent, et eis qui ad partes infidelium absque

sedis prædictæ licentia transfretarunt, vel merces prohibitas

detulerunt, et etiam qui Romanæ aut aliarum ecclesiarum possessiones,

jura, et bona occuparunt, excommunicationis et alias sententias et

pœnas, et quævis interdicta relaxent, et indulgentiam quam felicis

recordationis Urbanus Papa VI prædecessor noster, christifidelibus

certas basilicas et ecclesias dictæ urbis instanti anno visitantibus

concessit, et quæ in subsidium Terræ Sanctæ accedentibus conceduntur,

quibusvis elargiri pro nihilo ducant, . . . et quæstum, quem exinde

percipiunt, nomine cameræ apostolicæ se percipere asserant, et nullam

de illo nihilominus rationem velle reddere videantur: Horret et

merito indignatur animus, talia reminisci. . . . {444}

“Attendentes igitur quod nostra interest super tot tantisque malis

de opportunis remediis salubriter providere, fraternitati tuæ de

qua in iis et aliis specialem in domino fiduciam obtinemus, per

apostolica scripta committimus et mandamus, quatenus religiosis et

clericis sæcularibus hujusmodi, ac eorum familiaribus, complicibus,

et collegiis, et aliis, vocatis qui fuerint evocandi, summarie,

simpliciter, et de plano, ac sine strepitu et figura judicii,

etiam ex officio super præmissis, auctoritate nostra, inquiras

diligentius veritatem, et eos ad reddendum tibi computum de receptis

et reliqua consignandum, remota appellatione, compellas, et quos per

inquisitionem hujusmodi excessisse, vel non verum aut non sufficiens

seu ad id non habuisse mandatum inveneris, capias et tandiu sub fida

custodia teneas carceribus mancipatos, donec id nobis intimaveris.”

Baronius’ “Annales ecclesiastici”; continuation by Raynaldus, ed.

1752, vol. vii. p. 525.

Opinion of the University of Oxford on Pardoners, A.D. 1414:

“_Articulus tricesimus nonus; contra falsas prædicationes

quæstorum._—Quia inverecundi quæstores turpissimos suos quæstus

ad firmam emunt cum Simone, indulgentias vendunt cum Gyesi, et

adquisita consumunt cum filio prodigo inhoneste, sed quod magis est

detestabile, cum non sint in sacris ordinibus constituti, publice

prædicant, ac false prætendunt quod absolvendi a pœna et a culpa

tam superstites quam defunctos plenam habeant potestatem, cum aliis

blasphemiis, quibus populum spoliant ac seducunt, et verisimiliter

ad tartara secum trahunt, præstantes spem frivolam et audaciam ad

peccandum. Abusus igitur hujusmodi sectæ pestiferæ ab ecclesiæ

limitibus deleantur.”

_Articuli concernentes reformationem universalis ecclesiæ, editi per

universitatem Oxon._ Wilkins, “Concilia,” vol. iii. p. 365.

Suppression of pardoners by the Council of Trent, A.D. 1562:

“Cum multa a diversis antea conciliis, tam Lateranensi ac Lugdunensi,

quam Viennensi, adversus pravos eleemosynarum quæstorum abusus

remedia tunc adhibita, posterioribus temporibus reddita fuerint

inutilia, potiusque eorum malitia ita quotidie magno fidelium

omnium scandalo et querela excrescere deprehendatur, ut de eorum

emendatione nulla spes amplius relicta videatur, statuit ut posthac

in quibuscumque christianæ religionis locis eorum nomen atque usus

penitus aboleatur, nec ad officium hujusmodi exercendum {445}

ullatenus admittantur; non obstantibus privilegiis, ecclesiis,

monasteriis, hospitalibus, piis locis et quibusvis cujuscumque

gradus, status et dignitatis personis, concessis, aut consuetudinibus

etiam immemorabilibus. Indulgentias vero aut alias spirituales

gratias, quibus non ideo christifideles decet privari, deinceps per

ordinarios locorum, adhibitis duobus de capitulo, debitis temporibus

populo publicandas esse decernit. Quibus etiam eleemosynas, atque

oblata sibi charitatis subsidia, nulla prorsus mercede accepta,

fideliter colligendi facultas datur, ut tamdem cœlestes hos Ecclesiæ

thesauros, non ad quæstum sed ad pietatem exerceri, omnes vere

intelligant.”

“Conciliorum generalium Ecclesiæ catholicæ, Pauli V Pont. Max.

auctoritate editus.” Tomus iv, Rome, 1628, second paging, p. 261.

XVI

(p. 344)

THE FIRST RECORDED CRUCIFIX IN ENGLAND SCULPTURED FROM LIFE

Thomas of Burton, Abbot of Meaux, near Beverley, writes: “Dictus

autem Hugo abbas xv^{us} crucifixum novum in choro conversorum fecit

fabricari. Cujus quidem operarius nullam ejus formosam et notabilem

proprietatem sculpebat nisi in feria sexta, in qua pane et aqua

tantum jejunavit. Et hominem nudum coram se stantem prospexit,

secundum cujus formosam imaginem crucifixum ipsum aptius decoraret.

Per quem etiam crucifixum Omnipotens manifesta miracula fecerat

incessanter. Unde tunc etiam putabatur quod, si mulieres ad dictum

crucifixum accessum haberent, augmentaretur communis devotio, et in

quam plurimum commodum nostri monasterii, redundaret. Super quo abbas

Cistercii a nobis requisitus, suam licentiam nobis impertivit ut

homines et mulieres honestæ accedere possent ad dictum crucifixum,

dum tamen mulieres per claustrum et dormitorium seu alia officina

intrare non permittantur. . . . Cujus quidem licentiæ prætextu, malo

nostro, feminæ sæpius aggrediuntur dictum crucifixum, præcipue cum in

eis frigescat devotio, dum illuc ut ecclesiam tantum introspiciant

accesserint, et sumptus nostros augeant in hospitatione earundem.”

“Chronica monasterii de Melsa,” edited by E. A. Bond, 1866–68, vol.

iii. p. 35, Rolls Series. {446}

XVII

(p. 141, 362)

THE PILGRIMAGE OF REYNARD

Tired of his sins, duly shriven, ordered by the hermit to go to Rome,

and there receive absolution, Reynard,

“Escrepe et bordon prent, si muet,

Si est entres en son chemin,

Molt resemble bien pélerin,

Et bien li sist l’escrepe au col.”

He does not care to travel alone and, like most pilgrims, prefers

company:

“Mes de ce se tint il por fol

Qu’il est meüz sans compaignie,

Le grant chemin n’ira il mie,

Ançois l’avoit laissié à destre,

Une sente torne à senestre,”

and leads him to a place where he finds

“dan Belin

Le moton qui se reposoit,”

and whom he persuades to go with him, thus avoiding, he suggests,

being eaten by his owners. A third member, the donkey, is soon added

to their party:

“En lor chemin en sont entrè,

Mes il n’orent guères erré,

Qant trovent Bernart l’archeprestre

En un fossé les cardons pestre,”

and he is easily persuaded to follow. They enter the forest. Night

comes. Where shall they find shelter? Why should we, Reynard remarks,

look for any other “ostel” than the fine grass under this tree?

“Et nos queil ostel querrion

Fors la bele erbe soz cest arbre?

Meus l’eim que un paleis de marbre.”

{447}

Appealing as must have been the fine grass to him, Belin objects, the

wood being so dangerous. So they continue their journey until they

reach the “ostel Primaut,” that is the house of Primaut the Wolf, who

was away. There they find

“Char salée, formache et oes . . .

Si i trovent bone cervoise.

Tant boit Belins que il s’envoise;

Si a commencié à chanter

Et l’archeprestre à orguaner,

Et dan Renart chante en fauset.”

Concluding speech of Reynard, after the siege of the house by the

wolves, and the miscarriage of the pilgrimage:

“Segnor, dist Renart, par mon chef,

Cest eires est pesant et gref;

Il a el siécle meint prodome

Qu’ onques encor ne fu à Rome:

Tiex est revenuz de sept seinz

Qui est pires qu’il ne fu einz.

Je me voil metre en mon retor,

Et si vivrai de mon labor

Et gaaignerai léelment,

Si ferai bien à povre gent.

Lors ont crié: outrée, outrée!

Si ont fete la retornée.”

“Le roman de Renart,” ed. Ernest Martin, Strasbourg and Paris, 1882

ff, 7 vols.; i. pp. 269 ff.

ENDNOTES

INTRODUCTION

[1] “Year Books,” 30, 31 Edward I. Edited by A. J. Horwood, for the

Rolls Series, 1863.

PART I — ENGLISH ROADS

[2] And possibly, in early times, of roads also; see McKechnie,

“Magna Carta,” Glasgow, 1905, p. 353. On the _Trinoda_ or _Trimoda

Necessitas_, see W. H. Stevenson, in the “English Historical Review,”

Oct. 1914.

[3] “History of Rome,” translated by W. P. Dickson, London, 1886,

book viii. chap. v.

[4] J. Horsley, “Britannia Romana,” London, 1732, p. 391.

[5] H. M. Scarth, “Roman Britain,” S.P.C.K., London, 1883, p. 121.

Cf. T. Codrington, “Roman Roads in Britain,” S.P.C.K., 1903.

[6] When Henry VIII gave the lands of the dissolved monastery of

Christ Church to Canterbury Cathedral, he declared that he made this

donation “in order that charity to the poor, the reparation of roads

and bridges, and other pious offices of all kinds should multiply

and spread afar.” Elton, “Tenures of Kent,” London, 1867, p. 21.

The gift is made “in liberam, puram et perpetuam eleemosynam.” This

pious character was long continued: “As late as the period of the

Commonwealth land and money devoted to the maintenance of bridges

and causeys were definitely included among the charitable uses which

were to be unaffected by the sequestration of Bishops’ land and other

ecclesiastical revenues.” C. T. Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval

Law,” Selden Society, 1905, i. p. xxi.

[7] Thorold Rogers, “History of Agriculture and Prices in England,”

Oxford, 1866, vol. i. p. 138.

[8] See “Recherches historiques sur les congrégations hospitalières

des frères pontifes,” by M. Grégoire, late Bishop of Blois. Paris,

1818.

[9] This practice was inherited from the Roman builders, whose

formularies continued to be transcribed throughout the middle

ages. See Victor Mortet: “Un Formulaire du VIII^e siécle pour les

fondations d’édifices et de ponts d’après des sources d’origine

antique,” in “Bulletin monumental . . . de la Société française

d’Archéologie,” vol. 71, 1907, p. 443. The brief chapter in the

“Mappæ Clavicula” (still copied in the twelfth century), entitled

“De fabrica in aqua,” recommends that, “Si fabricam in aqua necesse

fuerit erigere, facis arcam triangulam,” _arca_ meaning _caisson_. In

this we see, Mr. Mortet writes, “la disposition venue de l’antiquité,

transmise et maintenue au moyen-âge, de la forme prismatique

triangulaire des avant-becs des ponts” (p. 461). This characteristic

was conspicuous, _e.g._ in the Avignon and London bridges (see the

picture, p. 45) as well as in the famous Roman Pont du Gard.

[10] On French mediæval bridges still in existence, their dates,

modes of construction, crosses and chapels, see C. Enlart, “Manuel

d’Archéologie Française,” Paris, 1902, ff. vol. ii. p. 264.

[11] May 17, 1373, original in French. “John of Gaunt’s Register,”

ed. S. Armitage Smith, London, 1911, vol. ii. p. 179. The work

was apparently in progress in 1374, since we find, on the 15th of

September of that year, an order to deliver to the same “trois

cheisnes covenables” from Okeden forest. _Ibid._, p. 240.

[12] “Ubi frequens habetur populi transitus.” “Registrum Palatinum

Dunelmense,” ed. Hardy, Rolls Series, 1875, vol. i. pp. 615, 641,

A.D. 1314. This was a quite usual practice. The popes, who had

every reason to be interested in the welfare of the great bridge at

Avignon, published numerous bulls granting indulgences and other

spiritual favours to the benefactors of the edifice. See “Bullaire

des indulgences concédées avant 1431 à l’œuvre du Pont d’Avignon,”

published by the Marquis de Ripert-Monclar, Paris, 1912. The

work contains the Latin text of papal bulls of 1281, 1290, 1343,

1353, 1366, 1371, 1397, 1430, 1431. The bull of 1343, issued by

Pope Clement VI, at Avignon, grants to givers “tres annos et tres

quadragenas,” and, under certain conditions, a plenary indulgence at

the time of death: “Siquis vero catholicus dictis fratribus . . .

secundum quantitatem substancie et qualitatem . . . de bonis sibi a

Deo collatis dederit vel transmiserit quoquo modo ad reparacionem

dicti pontis, . . . si talis infra annum . . . vere penitens ac

confessus ab hac luce decesserit, volumus et gratia speciali

concedimus quod ab omnibus peccatis suis remaneat absolutus.” As for

those who should be so bold as to hamper in any way the collections

made by the brothers for their bridge, their punishment would be

nothing less than excommunication (p. 6).

[13] “Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense,” ed. Hardy, Rolls Series, 1875,

vol. i. p. 507.

[14] “Itinerary,” ed. L. T. Smith, vol. v. p. 144.

[15] Certificates of Chantries, quoted in “English Gilds, the

Original Ordinances from MSS. of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth

Centuries,” ed. Toulmin Smith. E. E. T. S., 1870, p. 249. Gilds in

Rochester, Bristol, Ludlow, &c., did the same.

[16] Text of the time of Edward IV, but “copied from laws still

older.” “English Gilds,” as above, pp. 374, 411.

[17] “Archæologia,” vols. xxvii. p. 77; xxix. p. 380.

[18] “Cartularium Abbathiæ de Whiteby,” edited by J. C. Atkinson,

Durham, Surtees Society, 1881, vol. ii. p. 401. The original of the

Rosels contract is in Latin.

[19] Skeat’s edition, Text C, pas. x. l. 29, _et seq._

[20] Most of the French ones were dedicated to St. Nicholas, patron

of travellers.

[21] Fleet bridge outside Ludgate, Oldbourne (Holborn) bridge, both

of stone. Fleet bridge had been repaired by the mayor, John Wels, in

1431, “for,” says Stow, “on the coping is engraven Wels imbraced by

Angels.” “Survey of London,” ed. Kingsford, Oxford, 1908, 2 vols.,

vol. i. p. 26. The “Survey” had appeared in 1598, and been reprinted,

with important additions in 1603.

[22] “The earliest proof [of the existence of a timber bridge] is in

the record of the drowning of a witch at ‘Lundene brigce’ in King

Edgar’s time.” Kingsford, Stow’s “Survey,” as above, vol. ii. p. 273.

[23] Stow’s “Survey,” i. p. 23. Stow, who examined the accounts of

the bridge wardens for the year 1506 (22 Hen. VII), found that the

bridge expenses were at that time £815 17s. 2d.

[24] King John became personally acquainted with those works only

at a later date, viz. June 1206, when he landed at La Rochelle. He

visited Saintes in July and August, and made again some stay at La

Rochelle in October and November before sailing back to England. See

his _Itinerary_ in “A Description of the Patent Rolls in the Tower,”

by Thomas Duffus Hardy, London, 1835.

[25] See Appendix I. p 425.

[26] Stow’s “Survey,” ed. Kingsford, I. p. 23.

[27] Ibid., same edition, I. 25; II. 274. “Chronicles of London

Bridge,” by an Antiquary [Richard Thomson], London, 1827, pp. 187–193.

[28] As to the toll collected there from certain foreign merchants

A.D. 1334, see “Liber Albus,” ed. Riley, Introduction, p. l.

[29] “Scaligerana,” under the word “Londres.” The editions I have

seen give “mers de navires,” the true reading being certainly “mâts.”

An enlarged portion of Visscher’s panoramic view of London, 1616,

showing the “Bridge Gate” towards Southwark, with numerous mast-like

poles and heads on the top of them, serves as a frontispiece for vol.

iii. of my “Literary History of the English People.”

[30] “Euphues and his England,” 1st ed. 1580; Arber’s reprint, 1868,

p. 434. See besides the large coloured drawing of about the year

1600 (also the sketch above, p. 45), in the third part of Harrison’s

“Description of England,” edited by F. J. Furnivall for the New

Shakspere Society, 1877; and Mr. Wheatley’s notes on Norden’s Map of

London, 1593, in vol. i. p. lxxxix of the same work. Visitors coming

to London never failed to notice the bridge as one of the curiosities

of the town. Dunbar, the Scottish poet, in his “London,” written in

the early years of the sixteenth century, compliments the city on its

beauties, and especially its bridge:

“Upon thy lusty brigge of pylers white

Been merchauntis full royall to behold.”

The Greek Nicander Nucius of Corcyra, who visited England in 1545–6,

writes in his note-book: “A certain very large bridge is built,

affording a passage to those in the city to the opposite inhabited

bank, supported by stone cemented arches, and having also houses and

turrets upon it.” “Travels of Nicander Nucius,” Camden Society, 1841,

p. 7.

[31] F. de Belleforest, “L’ancienne et grande cité de Paris,” ed.

Dufour, 1882, p. 274.

[32] See woodcuts in “Le livre des Ordonnances de la ville de Paris,”

published by Vérard, 1500, reproduced by Claudin, “Histoire de

l’Imprimerie,” 1900, vol. ii. pp. 498, 499.

[33] “Staple of News,” ii. 4; acted 1626, ed. De Winter, 1905, p.

xviii.

[34] In “Works of Ben Jonson,” London, 1816, v. 215.

[35] “Chronicles of London Bridge by an Antiquary” [Richard Thomson],

London, 1827.

[36] See Appendix II. p. 426.

[37] “The Itinerary of John Leland,” edited by Miss Lucy Toulmin

Smith, London, 1907, vol. ii. pp. 27, 49.

[38] “The North Riding Record Society,” edited by the Rev. J. C.

Atkinson, London, vol. iii. part i. p. 33.

[39] Edward III gives the not insignificant sum of £15 for the

reparation of the bridge at Newcastle-upon-Tyne. “Roll of Thomas de

Brantingham,” ed. Devon, p. 392, 44 Ed. III.

[40] Yarm on the Tees, 44 miles north-north-west of York. The “king’s

highway” in question is the highroad from Scotland, leading to the

south, through York and London. The bridge was re-built in 1400 by

Skirlaw, Bishop of Durham.

[41] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. i. p. 468. The right of pontage is

frequently mentioned in the “Liber Custumarum,” edited by Riley,

Rolls Series.

[42] “Sciatis quod, in auxilium Pontis London, reparandi et

sustentandi, concessimus vobis quod . . . capiatis ibidem de rebus

venalibus ultra pontem predictum et subtus eundem transeuntibus

consuetudines subscriptas, videlicet . . .” Then follows a very long

list of dues. Text in Hearne’s “Liber niger Scaccarii . . . Accedunt

chartæ antiquæ,” London, 1774, vol. i. p. 478*.

[43] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 88.

[44] See Hist. MSS. Commission, 9th Report, part i. p. 284. On the

Rochester bridge, at first a wooden one, later rebuilt in stone,

and on its upkeep, see “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. iii. p. 254, 21

Ric. II, 1397. A view of the bridge appears on several seals, some

reproduced in De Gray Birch, “Seals in . . . the British Museum,”

London, 1887, 2 vols., No. 5336. On this important bridge and its

_biography_, see C. T. Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval Law,” 1905,

Selden Society, I., p. 203. Like many others, this very frequented

bridge, on the road from London to Canterbury, and which existed long

before the Conquest, was first of wood, then of stone, and is now

(since 1856) of iron.

[45] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 100, year 1338.

[46] “King Edward kept his feast of Christmas (1281) at Worcester.

From this Christmas till the purification of Our Lady, there was

such a frost and snow, as no man living could remember the like,

wherethrough five arches of London Bridge, and all Rochester Bridge

were borne downe, and carried away with the streame, and the like

hapned to many bridges in England.” Stow’s “Annales,” London, 1631,

p. 201. See Appendix III.

[47] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 91 (9 Edward III), 1335.

[48] Ibid., p. 350.

[49] “De pontibus et calcetis fractis et communibus transitibus, quis

ea reparare debeat et sustinere.” “Fleta” (end of thirteenth century,

below p. 111), I. ch. 20, § 41.

[50] _I.e._ the jury “of good and true men.” “Rolls of Parliament,”

vol. ii. p. 111.

[51] Several instances will be found in Appendix IV. p. 429.

[52] John Scott, “Berwick-upon-Tweed,” London, 1888, p. 408, _et seq._

[53] Ormerod, “History of Chester,” 1819, vol. i. p. 285.

[54] “Archæologia,” t. xix. p. 310.

[55] The date is shown by a will of the 24th of August, 1483, in

which a sum is left towards the building of the chapel to be erected

on Rotherham Bridge. See J. Guest, “Historic Notices of Rotherham,”

Worksop, 1879, fol., pp. 125–6. Two views of the bridge and chapel

are given, pp. 126 and 581.

[56] Camden’s “Britannia,” ed. Gough, vol. iii., Lond., 1789, pp.

38–9.

[57] T. Kilby, “Views in Wakefield,” 1843, fol.; J. C. and C. A.

Buckler, “Remarks upon Wayside Chapels,” Oxford, 1843.

[58] “Twenty marks were left towards the rebuilding of this bridge,

by John Cook, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 2 Rich. II, 1379.” E.

Mackenzie, “View of the County of Northumberland,” 1825, vol. ii. p.

111.

[59] “Faerie Queene,” Bk. iv. canto x.

[60] Mentioned by Leland: “High Bridge hath but one great arch, and

over a pece of it is a chapelle of St. George” (“Itinerary,” ed. L.

T. Smith, i. 29), which chapel had been first dedicated to St. Thomas

of Canterbury, but had apparently just been rebaptized, when Leland

saw it, Henry VIII having decided by a proclamation of November 16,

1538, that other saints might be saints, but this one was not.

[61] See a sketch of it, above, p. 21.

[62] “History of Chester,” London, 1819, vol. i. p. 285.

[63] Dugdale, “Warwickshire,” 1730, ii. 724.

[64] J. G. Wood, “The Principal Rivers of Wales,” London, 1813, vol.

ii. p. 271.

[65] The Countess of Norfolk complains to Parliament that, contrary

to their franchise, her tenants have been compelled to contribute

towards the building of the bridge at Huntingdon. “Rolls of

Parliament,” 1 Ric. II, year 1377.

[66] See F. Stone, “Picturesque Views of the Bridges of Norfolk,”

Norwich, 1830. Rough sketches of more than thirty old English bridges

appear in a curious engraving by Daniel King (seventeenth century),

bearing as a title: “An orthographical designe of severall viewes

vpon ye road in England and Wales,” and as a subscription: “This

designe is to illustrate Cambden’s Britannia, that where he mentions

such places the curious may see them, which is the indeavour, by Gods

assistance, of

“Y. S. Daniell King.”

A copy is bound in the MS. Harl. 2073, as fol. 126. Catterick Bridge

(_supra_ p. 54) is among the bridges there represented.

[67] “The Itinerary of John Leland,” ed. Lucy Toulmin Smith, London,

1907, 5 vols., iv. p. 137.

[68] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. i. p. 48, 18 Edward I, A.D. 1289.

[69] Ibid., vol. i. p. 424; 18 Edward II, 1324.

[70] Ibid., vol. i. p. 314; 8 Edward II.

[71] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. iii. p. 598; 7 and 8 Henry IV.

In the same way as for bridges, taxes were sometimes levied but

misapplied. See, in C. T. Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval Law,”

1905, i. p. 25, how William Caldecote of Aylesbury had been duly

authorized to levy a tax of one penny or one half-penny on carts of

various sorts, and one farthing on “every horse carrying goods for

sale that should pass along Walton street which leads from Walton to

Aylesbury for the maintenance of the said road, and that whereas the

said William so received in 11 Rich. II over and above the sum spent

on the repair of the road 24s. which remain in his hands, the road is

flooded and dangerous by his default.”

[72] Grandson and great-grandson of the two Despensers who had been

executed in 1326 by order of Queen Isabella, their estates being

confiscated.

[73] Ed. Siméon Luce, vol. i. p. 257.

[74] Royal Itineraries show, for instance, that in the 28th year

of his reign, Edward I changed seventy-five times his place of

abode, that is about three times each fortnight. “Liber quotidianus

Garderobæ,” London, 1787, p. lxvii.

[75] McKechnie, “Magna Carta,” 1905, p. 357.

[76] “Chronica monasterii de Melsa,” ed. E. A. Bond; Rolls Series,

1868, London, vol. iii. preface, p. xv.

[77] Patent Roll, 27 Edward III, in Rymer (ed. 1708), vol. v. p. 774.

See as to the repair of this same road in 1314, thirty-nine years

earlier, “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. i. p. 302 _b_.

[78] Riley’s “Memorials of London,” London, 1868, p. 291.

[79] Ordonance of March 1, 1388, “Recueil d’Isambert,” vol. vi. p.

665. On the state of roads and bridges and on travelling in France,

see d’Avenel, “L’Évolution des Moyens de Transport,” Paris, 1919.

[80] “Rolls of Parliament,” ii. p. 107.

[81] See frontispiece of this volume, and p. 14.

[82] To give shelter (“tego,” I shelter, in the enumeration devised

by St. Thomas Aquinas) was one of the seven “Works of Charity.” In

the evening prayers at home, in my childhood, part of which had been

handed down from remote times, travellers were still remembered, as

well as those who had been “bitten by venomous beasts.”

[83] See representations of these carts in the manuscripts of

the fourteenth century, and especially in MS. Roy., 10 E. IV, in

the British Museum, fol. 63, 94, 110, &c., and in the Louterell

psalter. We give above a facsimile of one of them, and further a

representation of a reaper’s cart from the Louterell psalter. See

also Bodl. MS. 264, fos. 42, 84, 103, 110.

[84] Thorold Rogers, “History of Agriculture and Prices,” i. pp.

650–661.

[85] “Statutes of the Realm,” 4 Edward III, ch. 3. Eight bushels

make a quarter. [The Act 25 Edward III, stat. 5, ch. 10, A.D. 1351,

provided that every measure of corn should be striken without heap,

and that the royal purveyors should use this measure. Hence the name

_strike_ for a bushel. L. T. S.]

[86] Statute 36 Edward III, stat. 1, ch. 2.

[87] See several texts in Appendix V. p. 430.

[88] A shape in use from the remotest times. Carriages quite similar

to those painted in our mediæval MSS. are to be seen on the alabaster

funeral chests of Etruscan days, for example at the Guarnacei Museum,

Volterra, in Italy, where there is an abundance of them, showing the

dead, in their own round-topped, richly ornamented carriage, on their

way to the other world.

[89] Representations of carriages of this kind are frequent in

manuscripts. Many are to be found, with two wheels and an abundance

of ornamentation, in the romance of King Meliadus (MS. of the

fourteenth century in the British Museum, Add. 12,228, fos. 198,

243). The celebrated four wheeled carriage of the Louterell psalter,

also of fourteenth century, is here reproduced. It is drawn by five

horses harnessed single file. On the second sits a postilion with a

short whip of several thongs; on the fifth, that is, the nearest to

the carriage, sits another postilion with a long whip of the shape in

use at the present day.

[90] La Tour-Landry relates a story of a holy hermit who saw in a

dream his nephew’s wife in purgatory. The demons were pushing burning

needles into her eyebrows. An angel told him that it was because she

had trimmed her eyebrows and temples, and increased her forehead, and

plucked out her hair, thinking to beautify herself and to please the

world. “Le livre du Chevalier de La Tour-Landry,” ed. Montaiglon,

Paris, 1854. An English translation of the fifteenth century was

published by the Early English Text Society in 1868.

[91] The king’s sister. Devon’s “Issues of the Exchequer,” 1837, p.

142. As Englished by Devon, the Latin text referred to would mean

that the receiver of the money and maker of the carriage was Master

la Zousche, but la Zousche was the clerk of the wardrobe, who had

the money from the Exchequer to give it to John le Charer, “per

manus John le Charer.” _Per_ has here the meaning of _pro_, a use of

the word of which several instances may be found in Du Cange. This

indication of Devon’s mistake is due to the late Mr. Bradshaw, of

Cambridge.

[92] Thorold Rogers, “History of Agriculture and Prices,” i. pp.

361–363.

[93] Curious representations of such litters are to be found in

mediæval manuscripts; for instance, the one here reproduced from

the MS. 118 Français, in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, fol.

285, where two persons are to be seen using the litter, a lady and

a wounded knight (Romance of Lancelot, fourteenth century); or in

the MS. Roy, 18 E. II, in the British Museum, fol. 7 (Chronicles of

Froissart).

[94] “Paston Letters,” 1422–1509, edited by Jas. Gairdner, 1872, vol.

i. p. 49; spelling modernized.

[95] Roy. 10 E. IV.

[96] Fol. 310.

[97] “A Description of the Patent Rolls . . . to which is added an

Itinerary of King John,” by T. Duffus Hardy, London, 1835.

[98] 1299–1300. “Liber quotidianus Garderobæ,” Society of

Antiquaries, London, 1787, p. 67.

[99] “Archers. And xxiiij archers on foote for garde of the kinge’s

body, who shall goe before the kinge as he travaleth thorough the

cuntry” (“King Edward II’s . . . Ordinances,” 1323, ed. Furnivall, p.

46).

[100] “Fleta, seu commentarius juris Anglicani, editio secunda,”

London 1685, lib. ii. cap. 2, 4. This treatise is believed to have

been composed in the Fleet prison by a lawyer in the time of Edward

I. It is later than 1292, for mention is made in it of the submission

of Scotland.

[101] Lib. ii. cap. 5. The ordinance of Edward II mentioned further,

p. 108, speaks only of the brand by a hot iron on the forehead. “King

Edward II’s Household and Wardrobe Ordinances,” A.D. 1323, Chaucer

Society, ed. Furnivall, 1876.

[102] Lib. ii. cap. 14, 15.

[103] He sent a _mandatum_ to this effect, and he withdrew it

when the king changed his mind as to the place where he wished to

go, which happened often enough. “Debet autem senescallus nomine

capitalis justitiarii cujus vices gerit mandare vicecomiti loci ubi

dominus rex fuerit declinaturus, quod venire faciat ad certum diem,

ubicumque tunc rex fuerit in ballivia sua, omnes assisas comitatus

sui et omnes prisones cum suis atachiamentis.” “Fleta,” lib. ii. cap.

3, § 4.

[104] “Habet etiam ex virtute officii sui potestatem procedendi

ad utlagationes et duella jungendi et singula faciendi quæ ad

justitiarios itinerantes, prout supra dictum est pertinent faciendi.”

“Fleta,” lib. ii. cap. 3, § 11.

[105] “Fleta,” lib. ii. cap. 3, § 9.

[106] “Original authority of the King’s Council,” p. 115.

[107] “The county is divided into hundreds or into wapentakes or

into wards, the term wapentake appearing in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire,

Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, the term ward in the northernmost

counties.” (“History of English Law before Edward I,” by Sir

Frederick Pollock and F. W. Maitland, Cambridge, 2 vols., 1895, vol.

i. p. 543.) At the head of the hundred was the bailiff, appointed

by the sheriff, acting under him, and giving also rise to numerous

complaints. See, e.g. “Rolls of Parliament,” ii. 357, a petition of

1376.

[108] The lists which have reached us “leave us doubting whether any

of them had received a solemn sanction from the central power.” Same

“History of English Law,” ii. 508. On the origin, growth, decay, uses

and abuses of the institution, see W. A. Morris, “The Frankpledge

System,” London, 1910.

[109] In many places great people, lay or ecclesiastic, had somehow

secured for themselves the properly royal privilege of holding the

“view”; it became attached to some manors and was conveyed with them.

See the petition of an abbess who claims the view of frankpledge

attached to the manor of Shorwalle, Isle of Wight, which had been

given her; Isabella de Forte disputes her this right, the real object

of the quarrel between the two ladies being the fines levied when the

view was held.

Towards the end of the fourteenth century the frankpledge had fallen

into decay.

[110] “Magna Carta,” cap. 42 of the second confirmation by Henry

III (1217); Stubbs’ “Select Charters,” p. 337. “Nec liceat alicui

vicecomiti vel ballivo tenere turnum suum per hundredum nisi bis per

annum;” “Fleta,” Lib. ii. cap. 52.

[111] See Appendix VI, p. 431.

[112] “The articles for the London eyre of 1244 are in ‘Munimenta

Gildhallæ,’ i. 79; those for the eyre of 1321 are in ‘Munim. Gild.,’

ii. 347. The latter are fully seven times as long as the former and

fill fifteen octavo pages.” Pollock and Maitland, “History of English

Law,” ii. 519; cf. “Fleta,” i. cap. 19 and 20: “De Processu coram

Justiciariis itinerantibus—De capitulis Coronæ et Itineris.”

[113] Originally, _custos placitorum coronæ_, record keeper of the

pleas of the Crown.

[114] In existence also in France and Germany from the earliest

times, thus defined in the “Grand Coutumier de Normandie,” chap. 54:

“Il ne doit être crié fors pour cause criminelle, si comme pour feu

et pour larcin ou pour homicide ou pour autre évident péril, si comme

si aucun court sus à un autre le couteau trait. Car cil qui crie haro

sans apert (obvious) péril le doit amender au prince . . . A ce cri

doivent isser tous ceux qui l’ont oui.” This custom remained in use

in Normandy until the French Revolution. Glasson, “Origines de la

clameur de haro,” Paris, 1882. In England the statutes concerning the

“hue and cry” were repealed only in 1827.

[115] “Fleta,” lib. i. cap. 19, 20. See also “Local Self-Government

and Centralization,” by Toulmin Smith, 1848, pp. 220–232, 298.

[116] “Mais de cler jour, à la veue de toutz, issint qe gentz de

pays puissent veer la peine et la hounte que les ditz atteintz ount,

et par tant en soient les meuz chastiez.” Year, probably, 33 Ed. I;

Palgrave, “Original Authority of the King’s Council,” p. 56.

[117] Reeves, “History of English Law,” ed. Finlason, ii. p. 408.

[118] Prologue to the “Canterbury Tales;” The Monk.

[119] See Appendix VII, p. 432.

[120] “Household Expenses of Richard de Swinfield,” ed. J. Webb,

1854, Camden Society, vols. i. p. 125, ii. pp. xxx–xxxvi. The duels

of Thomas de Bruges were not those of the cases of felony and crime

which resulted in the death of the vanquished; it was merely the duel

with staff and shield, _cum fuste et scuto_, which required, as may

be imagined, the replacement of the champion much less frequently. In

the twenty-ninth year of Edward III, a duel took place by means of

champions between the Bishop of Salisbury and the Earl of Salisbury.

When the judges, conformably to the laws, came to examine the dress

of the combatants, they found that the bishop’s champion had several

sheets of prayers and incantations sown in his garments (“Year Books

of Edward I,” Rolls Series, 32–33d year, preface, p. xvi, note). This

examination of the clothing was always made with the intention of

discovering frauds of this kind, which were considered as the most

dangerous and disloyal of all.

[121] See Riley’s “Liber Albus,” p. 303, where the case is entered in

full.

[122] One has only to peruse Froissart to notice the extreme

frequency of this custom. Jean de Hainaut arrives at Denain: “There

he lodged in the abbey that night” (lib. i. part i. ch. 14); the

queen disembarks in England with the same Jean de Hainaut, “and then

they found a great abbey of black monks which is called St. Aymon,

and they were harboured there and refreshed for three days” (ch. 18);

“there the king stopped and lodged in an abbey” (ch. 292); “King

Philippe came to the good town of Amiens, and there lodged in the

abbey of Gard” (ch. 296), etc.

[123] “The Knights Hospitallers in England,” edited by Larking and

Kemble, Camden Society, 1857. It is the text of a manuscript found at

Malta entitled, “Extenta terrarum et tenementorum Hospitalis Sancti

Johannis Jerusalem in Anglia, A.D. 1338.”

[124] “Knights Hospitallers,” pp. 99, 101, 127. The effect of the

Scottish wars on the possessions of the Knights is strikingly set

forth: “Omnes possessiones hospitalis in Scocia sunt destructa,

combusta per fortem guerram ibidem per multos annos continuatam unde

nil his diebus potest levari. Solebat tamen, tempore pacis, reddere

per annum, cc marcas” (p. 129).

[125] See Appendix VIII, p. 433.

[126] Statute 3 Edward I, cap. 1.

[127] Statute 9 Edward II, cap. 11, _Articuli Cleri_, A.D. 1315–1316.

[128] “Fleta,” lib. i. cap. 20, § 68, 72.

[129] “Rolls of Parliament,” iii. p. 501, A.D. 1402.

[130] Ibid., iii. p. 82, A.D. 1379–80. The clergy, on the other hand,

complain that the sheriffs sometimes come “with their wives and other

excessive number of people on horseback as well as on foot,” to stay

in monasteries, under pretext of collecting monies for the king.

Ibid. p. 26, A.D. 1377.

[131] “Inventories of St. Mary’s Hospital, or Maison Dieu, Dover,” by

M. E. C. Walcott, “Archæologia Cantiana,” London, 1869.

[132] “Mensæ de medio removentur,” or, in the English version by S.

Bateman, of 1582, fol. 81, “when they have eaten, boord, clothes,

and reliefe bee borne awaye”—description of a dinner in England, by

Bartholomew the Englishman (de Glanville), 13th century. “Bartholomi

Anglici de proprietatibus rerum,” Frankfort, 1609, lib. vi. cap. 32.

Smollett, in the eighteenth century, notes the existence of similar

customs in Scotland; people dine, then sleep in the hall, where

mattresses are stretched, replacing the tables (“Humphrey Clinker”).

[133] “Hall and chamber, for litter, 20d.; hall and chamber, for

rushes, 16d.; hall, &c., for litter, 1d., &c.” Extracts from the

“Rotulus familiæ,” 18 Ed. I, “Archæologia,” vol. xv. p. 350. The king

was then at Langley Castle, Buckinghamshire.

[134] Turner and Parker, “Domestic Architecture in England,

from Edward I to Richard II,” Oxford, 1853, p. 75. See also in

“Archæologia,” vi. p. 366, the illustrated description of the royal

hall at Eltham.

[135] Eclogue III in the edition of the “Cytezen and Vplondyshman,”

published by the Percy Society, 1847, p. li.

[136] “The Vision concerning Piers the Plowman,” ed. Skeat, Text B,

passus x. line 96.

[137]

“Chascuns ne gist mie a part soy,

Mais deux et deux en chambre obscure,

Ou le plus souvent troy et troy,

En un seul lit à l’aventure,”

with fleas as big as those of the monks of Citeaux. “Œuvres

Complètes,” ed. de Queux de St. Hilaire, vol vii. pp. 79, 117.

[138] “Works,” Skeat, iv, 595.

[139] Statutes 23 Ed. III, ch. 6, and 27 Ed. III, st. 1, ch. 3.

As to the inns of the Middle Ages, see Francisque Michel and Ed.

Fournier, “La Grande Bohème, histoire de classes réprouvées,” vol.

i, “Hôtelleries et cabarets,” Paris, 1851; d’Avenel, “L’évolution

des Moyens de Transport,” Paris, 1919. There is in the “Vetusta

monumenta,” vol. iv, 1815, pl. xxxv., a fine view of the George

Inn at Glastonbury (fifteenth century). The New Inn at Gloucester,

Northgate-street, is a good specimen of an English inn of the

fifteenth century (below, p. 131). Charming sketches of several by

Herbert Railton adorn an article on “Coaching Days and Coaching

Ways,” in the “English Illustrated Magazine,” July, 1888. See also

Turner and Parker, who mention several, of the fifteenth century,

“Domestic Architecture,” vol. iii. pp. 46 ff.

[140] The Latin text of their account of expenses was published by

Thorold Rogers in his “History of Agriculture and Prices,” ii. p. 638.

[141] “Liber Albus,” ed. Riley, Introduction, p. lviii. Cf. the

journey from Cambridge to York of a party of twenty-six scholars,

in 1319. The beds, wherever they sleep, uniformly cost 8d. for the

twenty-six. W. W. Rouse Ball, “Cambridge Papers,” London, 1918, ch.

ix. “A Christmas Journey in 1319.”

[142] See Appendix IX.

[143] Published by Prof. Paul Meyer in the _Revue Critique_ (1870),

vol. x. p. 373.

[144] “Bon souper, bon gîte, et le reste” (La Fontaine).

[145] Riley’s “Memorials of London,” p. 386.

[146] Ed. Barack, Nurenberg, 1858; Fr. translation by Magnin, Paris,

1845.

[147] F. Michel and E. Fournier, “La Grande Bohème” I, pp. 200 ff.

[148] Furnivall, “Tale of Beryn,” Early English Text Society, 1887,

p. viii., or Arber, “English Garner,” vi. 84.

[149]

“When all this ffreshe feleship were com to Cauntirbury . . .

They toke hir In, and loggit hem at mydmorrowe, I trowe,

Atte ‘Cheker of the hope,’ that many a man doith knowe.”

Prologue to the “Tale of Beryn.” E.E.T.S., 1909, p. 1.

[150] Statutes for the City of London, 13 Ed. I, “Statutes of the

Realm,” vol. i. p. 102, A.D. 1285.

[151] Articles of the View of Frankpledge, of probably 18 Ed. II,

“Statutes,” vol. i. p. 246 (French text).

[152] Hugh the needle-seller.

[153] “Piers the Plowman,” Skeat’s edition, Text C, passus vii. ll.

364–370, 394.

[154]

“Par ces tavernes chacun jour,

Vous en trouveriez à séjour,

Beuvans là toute la journée

Aussi tost que ont fait leur journée.

Maint y aconvient aler boire:

Là despendent, c’est chose voire,

Plus que toute jour n’ont gaigné.

* * * * *

Là ne convient il demander

S’ilz s’entrebatent quand sont yvres;

Le prévost en a plusieurs livres

D’amande tout au long de l’an.

* * * * *

Et y verriés de ces gallans

Oyseux qui tavernes poursuivent,

Gays et jolis.”

“Le Livre de la mutacion de fortune,” Bk. iii, MS. Fr. 603,

Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. Christine de Pisan’s “Œuvres

poétiques,” are being published by the “Société de Anciens textes

Français,” ed. Maurice Roy, 1886 ff.

[155] “Elynour Rummynge.” “Poetical Works of John Skelton,” ed. Dyce,

1843, vol. i. p. 95.

[156] Jurors find in 1375 that the bridge in the midst of the causey

between Brant Broughton and Lincoln was primarily made “by a certain

hermit after the first pestilence,” and consisted “in a board placed

above the ford” which had to be waded through: “Jurati dicunt supra

sacramentum suum . . . quod pons predictus post primam pestilenciam

ibidem primo per quendam heremitum factus fuit, ponendo tabulam ultra

quoddam vadum in medio calceti predicti.” Complete text in C. T.

Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval Law,” Selden Society, 1915, i. 263.

[157] “Roman de Renart,” Branch viii. ed. Martin i. p. 267. On the

outcome of this confession, see further, Part iii. chap. iii.

[158] The son of a mayor of York; d. about 1235. Miracles are said to

have been worked at the Knaresborough hermitage, Yorkshire, where he

had lived and was buried.

[159] “English Prose Treaties,” ed. Perry, E.E.T.S., 1866, pp. xv,

xvi. Rolle died in 1349.

[160] Ibid. p. 5.

[161] Another example still in existence is the hermitage at

Warkworth, Northumberland, partly of masonry and partly scooped

out of the rock. It was apparently enlarged by its successive

inhabitants, but seems from the style of the windows and carvings to

belong mostly to the fourteenth century.

[162] “The Metrical Life of Saint Robert of Knaresborough,” ed.

Haslewood and Douce, Roxburghe Club, 1824, p. 36. Cf. “Rotuli

Chartarum in Turri Londinensi asservati,” ed. T. D. Hardy, 1837, p.

158, where King John is seen bestowing on one Robert, in 1205, “locum

in quo heremitorium sancte Wereburge sedet” (the famous St. Werburga,

abbess of Ely, seventh century). He does so “pro amore Dei et pro

salute anime nostre.” He grants, “in puram et perpetuam elemosinam,”

the “heremitorium de Godeland” to the monks of Whitby, Oct. 26, 1205,

ibid, p. 159.

[163] Both sorts generally lived by themselves, but the recluse

never left his cell while the hermit could roam about. “Issue Roll

of Thomas de Brantingham,” ed. Devon, p. 393, 44 Ed. III; the same

king gives also 20s. “in aid of her support” to “Alice de Latimer a

recluse anchorite,” ibid. p. xxxvi.

[164] “Teste Rege, apud Westmonasterium, 1º die Octobris [1399].”

Rymer’s “Fœdera.”

[165] See, for an example of a hermit settled at the corner of a

bridge, an Act of resumption which formally excepts a grant of 14s.

yearly to the “Heremyte of the Brigge of Loyne and his successours,”

4 Ed. IV, “Rolls of Parliament,” v. p. 546. Another example is to be

found in J. Britton, “On Ancient Gate-houses,” “Memoirs illustrative

of the History of Norfolk,” London, Archæological Institute, 1851,

p. 137, where hermits are mentioned who lived on Bishop’s Bridge,

Norwich, in the thirteenth century and after.

[166] See before, pp. 41 ff.

[167] See above as to the part taken by the clergy in the collection

of offerings, and in the care and maintenance of bridges, chap. i.

[168] 12 Rich. II, chap. vii, “Statutes of the Realm.” A sample

of a hermit’s vow, with an analysis of a fourteenth-century text

describing the ceremony for the consecration of a hermit, is in E. L.

Cutts, “Scenes and Characters of the Middle Ages,” 1872, pp. 98, 99.

A list is given, p. 111, of the still subsisting English hermitages.

[169] “Piers Plowman,” Skeat’s edition, Text C, passus i. l. 30;

passus x. l. 195.

[170] Ibid., passus x. l. 188.

[171] Look humbly to gain alms.

[172] “Piers Plowman,” Skeat’s edition, Text C, passus x. ll. 140–152.

[173] Text C, passus x. ll. 251–256.

[174]

“Li abis ne fet pas l’ermite;

S’uns hom en hermitage abite

Et s’il en a les dras vestus,

Je ne pris mie deus festus

Son abit ne sa vesteure,

S’il ne maine vie aussi pure

Comme son abit nous démonstre;

Mes maintes genz font bele monstre

Et merveilleux sanblant qu’il vaillent:

Il sanblent les arbres qui faillent

Qui furent trop bel au florir.”

Le Dit de frère Denise. “Œuvres complètes de Rutebeuf,” ed. Jubinal,

Paris, 1874, vol. ii. p. 63.

[175] Printed in the “Archæological Journal,” vol. iv. p. 69.

[176] “E, sire, les avant ditz William e Richart e plusours gentz de

la ville de Lichfield sount menacé des ditz larons e lour maintenours

qu’ils n’osent nule part aler hors de la dite ville.”

[177] Richard II had several times to renew and confirm them, but

without effect. In his first statute upon this subject he condemns

the superabundance of retainers which many men, though of indifferent

means, delight in; he declares “that divers people of small revenue

of land, rent, or other possessions, do make great retinue of people,

as well of esquires as of other, in many parts of the realm” (1

Richard II, cap. 7, A.D. 1377). The third statute of 13 Richard II,

that of his 16th year (cap. 4), that of his 20th year (cap. 1 and 2),

are likewise directed against the abuse of liveries and the number

of retainers of the “lords spiritual and temporal.” Henry VI renewed

these statutes, also without result.

[178] 10 Ed. III, year 1336.

[179] Those who divided among themselves the prospective profit of a

lawsuit “maintained” in this way, were called “champertors,” _campi

participes_, which was forbidden by numerous statutes. See e.g. the

“Ordinacio de Conspiratoribus,” 33 Ed. I, year 1305.

[180] 4 Ed. III, chap. 2, year 1330.

[181] 20 Ed. III, chap. 4, 5, 6, year 1346.

[182] “Le Roi désire que commun droit soit fait à toutz, auxibien à

povres come à riches.” 1 Ed. III, stat. ii, ch. 14.

[183] In the petition to the Good Parliament, 1376, she is included

among “les femmes qui ont pursuys en les Courtz du Roi diverses

busoignes et quereles par voie de maintenance et pur lower (gain) et

part avoir.”

[184] Statute 2 Richard II, stat. i. cap. 6, A.D. 1378.

[185] The picture in this statute is so complete that there is

scarcely need to quote other texts; they are, however, numerous. In

the petitions to parliament will be found many complaints by private

people for acts of violence of which they had been victims, for

imprisonment by their enemies, robberies, arson, destruction of game

or fish in the parks. Examples: petition of Agnes Atte Wode, she and

her son beaten and robbed (ibid. i. p. 372); of Agnes of Aldenby,

beaten by malefactors (“Rolls of Parliament,” i. p. 375); of the

inhabitants of several towns of the county of Hertford, who have been

imprisoned and forced to pay ransom by the knight John of Patmer (i.

p. 389); of John of Grey, who was attacked by fifteen malefactors so

resolute as to set fire to a town and storm a castle (i. p. 397);

of Robert Power, who is robbed and his mansion sacked, his people

beaten, by “men all armed as men of war” (i. p. 410); of Ralph le

Botiller, who has seen his mansion pillaged and burnt by eighty men,

who came with arms and baggage, bringing ropes and hatchets on carts

(ii. p. 88), etc. In France, it is well known, the misdeeds of this

kind were still more numerous but then a continual state of war was

raging there.

[186] “Rolls of Parliament,” ii. p. 351.

[187] One founded with that object by Matthew of Dunstable in 1295,

and “known as the chantry of Biddenham bridge in Bromham parish.”

“Victoria History of the Counties of England,” Bedfordshire, vol.

iii. p. 49.

[188] “Statutes of the Realm,” year 1285.

[189] “Chronica Monasterii de Melsa,” Rolls Series, ii. 275.

[190] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 201 (22 E. III, 1348).

[191] Ibid., vol. ii. p. 165.

[192] Earliest reference in England: that in the laws of Ethelbert,

King of Kent, later part of the sixth century, where it is said that

“the penalty for violation of church _frith_ is to be twice that

exacted for an ordinary breach of peace.” Trenholme, “The Right of

Sanctuary in England,” University of Missouri Studies, 1903, p. 11.

[193] Trenholme, as above, p. 48.

[194] R. W. Billings, “Architectural Illustrations . . . of the

Church at Durham,” London, 1843, p. 20.

[195] “Erant hujusmodi cathedrarum multæ in Anglia . . . Beverlaci

autem celeberrima, quæ priscorum regum benignitate (puta Æthelstani

vel alterius cujuspiam) asyli nacta privilegium, tali honestabatur

inscriptione: ‘Hæc sedes lapidea _Freedstoll_ dicitur, i.e. pacis

cathedra, ad quam reus fugiendo perveniens, omnimodam habet

securitatem.’” H. Spelman, “Glossarium Archaiologicum,” 3rd ed.,

London, 1687, p. 248.

[196] Though every consecrated place was a sanctuary, some of them

afforded far more safety than others, the penalties for abductors

being much greater. A list of the safest of the English sanctuaries

is in S. Pegge, “A Sketch of the History of the Asylum or Sanctuary,”

in “Archæologia,” 1787, vol. viii. p. 41.

[197] “Brevis annotatio Ricardi, prioris Hagustaldensis ecclesiæ de

antiquo et moderno statu ejusdem ecclesiæ,” ed. Raine, “The priory

of Hexham,” Surtees Society, 1864–5, 2 vols. illustrated, i. 62. The

prior has also a chapter v, “De pace inviolabili per unum milliare

circumquaque ipsius ecclesiæ,” p. 19, and a chapter xiv on the

privileges, granted by the king, to the Hexham Sanctuary, p. 61.

[198] Raine, as above, II, p. lxiv. Wright’s “Essay” appeared in 1823.

[199] Usually worn by the accused, but the law officer’s intrusion

would have made him a guilty man. “Carcannum,” says Du Cange,

“collistrigium, vinculum quo rei collum stringitur, nostris,

_carcan_.”

[200] J. Raine, “Sanctuarium Dunelmense et Sanctuarium Beverlacense,”

London, Surtees Society, 1827, p. xxv.

[201] See Appendix X, p. 434.

[202] “Sanctuarium Dunelmense et Sanctuarium Beverlacense,” p. 111.

[203] Penance of this kind was not applied only to men. Women of all

ranks were obliged to submit to it. In the same Register Palatine

of Durham may be seen the case of Isabella of Murley, condemned

for adultery with her sister’s husband, John d’Amundeville, to

receive publicly “six whippings around the market of Durham” (vol.

ii. p. 695). The case was not one of people of the lower sort; the

Amundeville family was powerful and old-established in the county.

Particulars about them from the thirteenth century may be found

in Surtees, “History and Antiquities of the County Palatine of

Durham,” London, 1823, vol. iii. p. 270. Another example is in the

“Constitutiones . . . Walteri de Cantilupo” (Bishop of Worcester),

A.D. 1240; Wilkins’ “Concilia Magnæ Britanniæ et Hiberniæ,” London,

1757, vol. i. p. 668.

[204] “Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense,” ed. Sir T. D. Hardy, London,

1875, vol. i. p. 315, A.D. 1313.

[205] Henry IV or Henry V. Raine, “Sanctuarium Dunelmense,” p. xvii.

[206] “Historical Notices of the Collegiate Church or Royal free

Chapel and Sanctuary of St. Martin le Grand, London,” by A. J. Kempe,

London, 1825, p. 136.

[207] “Croniques de London,” edited by G. J. Aungier, Camden Society,

1844, p. 48; written by a contemporary of the events.

[208] “Articuli cleri,” statute 9 E. II, cap. 10.

[209] He forbids those on guard to stay in the cemetery, unless there

is imminent danger of flight. The felon may have the “necessaries of

life” in the sanctuary.

[210] “Statutes of the Realm,” i. p. 250, text of uncertain date,

but probably of the reign of Edward II. All this was classified

as “Abuses” by the not very trustworthy author of the “Mirror for

Justices” (Andrew Horne?), early fourteenth century, ed. Whittaker

and Maitland, Selden Soc., 1895, p. 158. At all events it was the

law. According to “Fleta,” lib. i. cap. xxix, at the end of forty

days in sanctuary, if the malefactors have not abjured the kingdom,

food must be refused to them, and they will no longer be allowed to

emigrate. On the road to the port, according to the same, the felon

wore a garb which would cause him to be recognized, being “ungirt,

un-shod, bare-headed, in his bare shirt, as if he were to be hanged

on the gallows, having received a cross in his hands,” “discinctus et

discalceatus, capite discooperto, in pura tunica, tanquam in patibulo

suspendendus, accepta cruce in manibus.” “Fleta” stated that he must

try to cross, till he got into water, not up to the knees, but up to

the neck. On the “Abjuratio Regni,” see the capital article, with a

complete bibliography of the subject by André Réville, in the “Revue

Historique,” Sept. 1892.

[211] “The Sanctuaries and Sanctuary Seekers of Mediæval England,”

by the Rev. J. Charles Cox, quoting a coroner’s roll of the time of

Edward III. London, 1911, p. 28.

[212] Statute 2 Rich. II, stat. 2, chap. 3. These frauds had been

already complained of under Edward III. A petition of the Commons

in the parliament of 1376–77 (“Rolls of Parliament,” ii. p. 369),

declares that certain people, after having received money or

merchandise on loan, and having made a pretended gift of all their

property to friends, “flee to Westminster, St. Martin’s, or other

such privileged places, and lie there a long time, . . . so long that

the said creditors are only too pleased to take a small part of their

debt and release the rest.” Then the debtors return home, and their

friends give them back their property.

[213] See Appendix X, p. 435.

[214] A. J. Kempe, “Historical Notices of . . . St. Martin le Grand,”

London, 1825, p. 135.

[215] Statute 9 Ed. II, cap. 15.

[216] “Croniques de London,” Camden Society, 1884, p. 42.

[217] See Appendix X.

[218] “Croniques de London,” Camden Society, 1844, p. 52.

[219] “The History of King Richard the Thirde (unfinished), writen by

Master Thomas More, than one of the Under Sherriffs of London: about

the yeare of our Lorde, 1513,” “Workes,” London, 1557. Reprinted by

S. W. Singer, Chiswick, 1821, p. 55.

[220] “The History of King Richard the Thirde,” pp. 44, 45. A list of

the “contents” of the same Westminster sanctuary, in 1532, has been

printed by the Rev. J. C. Cox, showing that “there were then fifty

fugitives, including one woman under the protection of the abbey, as

life prisoners, one of whom had been there for twenty years. Sixteen

were there for felonies, probably all robberies, eleven for murder

or homicide, eighteen for debt, and two for sacrilege,” the church

having particular merit in protecting the latter. One was a priest:

“Sir James Whytakere, preste, for murdre”; some were there for a

matter so small as to inspire pity: “John ap Howell for felony; a

poore mane, for stellynge of herrings.” “Sanctuaries,” 1911, pp. 72

ff.

[221] “History of the reign of King Henry VII,” Ellis and Spedding’s

edition of Bacon’s Works, vol. vi. p. 43. Bacon says that Henry “was

tender in the privilege of sanctuaries, though they wrought him much

mischief” (p. 238).

[222] 21 James I, cap. 28, § 7; “Statutes,” vol. iv. part ii. p. 1237.

[223] “Rolls of Parliament,” 21 Ed. III, vol. ii. p. 178. See also

the petition of the Commons in 1350–51, 25 Ed. III, vol. ii. p. 229.

[224] “Our lord the king by untrue recommendations has several

times granted his charter of pardon to notorious robbers and to

common murderers, when it is given him to understand that they are

staying for his wars beyond the sea, whence they suddenly return

into their country to persevere in their misdeeds.” The king orders

that on the charter shall be written “the name of him who made the

recommendation to the king;” the judges before whom this charter

shall be presented by the felon to have his liberty shall have the

power to make inquiry, and if they find that the recommendation is

not well founded, they shall hold the charter of non effect. “Rolls

of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 253, A.D. 1353.

[225] Regulations of 1313. “Munimenta Academica; or documents

illustrative of academical life and studies at Oxford,” edited by H.

Anstey, London, 1868, Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 91. The penalty was

prison and the loss of the weapons.

[226] 5 Edward III, cap. 14.

[227] A characteristic example of thief-catching, the man being a

vagabond, is in Thorold Rogers: William atte Lane had “feloniously

bereft Richard [de Herbarton] of a striped gown, worth ten

shillings.” Richard ran after him, “cum hutesio et clamore,” and the

man was caught “by the bailiff of the liberty of Holywell, Oxford.”

William pleaded not guilty and asked for a jury, “ponit se super

patriam.” The jury found him guilty, ordered that he restitute the

gown to Richard, and as he had no goods to make atonement, and was “a

vagabond belonging to no ward,” he be hanged, “suspendatur,” (Dec. 8,

1337); the marginal note “susp.” shows that he was actually hanged.

“Hist. of Agriculture,” ii. 665.

[228] Statute of Winchester, 13 Ed. I, cap. 4.

[229] “Clamor patriæ” in the Latin texts, “Fleta” for example;

“clameur de haro” in France, where the practice existed even before

the time of Childebert, sixth century, and was still in use, in

Normandy at least, until the Revolution. See above, p. 114, note 1.

[230] This power of running down the first comer was, like many

practices of the time, at once a guarantee for public safety and

a dangerous arm in the hands of felons. Robbers used it, and it

happened sometimes that they imprisoned by this means their own

victims. Alisot, wife of Henry of Upatherle, sets forth to the king

that her husband was made prisoner by the Scotch at the battle of

Stirling, remained their captive more than a year, then returned

after having paid forty pounds ransom. In his absence, Thomas of

Upatherle and Robert of Prestbury seized on the fields which he

possessed at Upatherle, divided them, pulled down the houses and

acted as the owners, taking to their own homes all the goods they

could move. The prisoner’s return surprised them; as soon as they

knew that he had re-appeared on his lands, “the said Thomas, by false

agreement between him and the said Robert, raised hue and cry on the

said Henry and put upon him that he had robbed him (Thomas) of his

chattels to the value of £100.” They were believed; “the said Henry

was taken and imprisoned in Gloucester castle for a long time,”

waiting for the coming of the justices, exactly as the statute said.

Henry recovered his liberty in the end, and obtained a writ against

his enemies; but they brought force and came to meet their victim,

“and beat the said Henry in the town of Gloucester, that is they

bruised his two arms, both his thighs, and both his legs, and his

head on both sides, and quite wrecked and vilely treated his body, so

that he barely escaped death.” The king’s reply is not satisfactory:

“If the husband be alive, the plaint is his, if he be dead the wife’s

plaint is nothing.” “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 35, A.D. 1330.

PART II — LAY WAYFARERS

[231] “Diz de l’Erberie.” “Œuvres complètes de Rutebeuf,” Jubinal’s

edition, 1874, vol. ii. p. 58.

[232] Isambert, “Recueil Général des anciennes lois Françaises,” vol.

iii. p. 16, and iv. p. 676.

[233] “The Play of the Sacrament,” “Philological Society

Transactions,” ed. Whiteley Stokes, 1860, p. 127.

[234] “Let scarlet cloth be taken, and let him who is suffering

small-pox be entirely wrapped in it or in some other red cloth; I

did thus when the son of the illustrious King of England suffered

from small-pox; I took care that all about his bed should be red, and

that cure succeeded very well.” Original in Latin, “Joannis Anglici,

Praxis Medica Rosa Anglica dicta,” Augsburg, 1595, lib. ii. p. 1050.

To which Gaddesden, I now make humble apologies: for since the above

lines were written years ago, modern discoveries, those especially of

Niels Finsen, of Copenhagen, a man of the truest worth, whom I saw at

work, have justified him. Red light, it has been found, really has

an influence on the healing of the scars left by small-pox, and even

of the disease itself. So, biding the time when his beetle remedy,

mentioned next, may prove operative too, I hold Gaddesden justified

in turning, from above, the laugh on his deriders: and I submit to

the penance in the same contrite spirit as Dr. Johnson once did at

Uttoxeter.

[235] “Rosa Anglica,” vol. i. p. 496.

[236] A remedy for diseases of the spleen (“Rosa Anglica”).

[237] “Memorials of London,” documents relating to the thirteenth,

fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, edited by H. Riley, London, 1868,

p. 466.

[238] “L’ordinance encontre les entremettours de fisik et de

surgerie,” “Rolls of Parliament,” 9 Hen. V, vol. iv. p. 130.

[239] Their charter of 1461 is given in Report and Appendix of the

City Liveries’ Commission, 1884, vol. iii. p. 74. [L. T. S.]

[240] “The Foure P.” London, 1545.

[241] Statute 3 Hen. VIII, cap. 11.

[242] Statutes 32 Hen. VIII, cap. 42; 34 and 35 Hen. VIII, cap. 8.

[243] “The Fox,” Act II, sc. 1 (1605).

[244] “Coryat’s Crudities,” reprinted from the edition of 1611,

London, 1776, vol. ii. pp. 50, 53. Coryat set out from Dover, 14 May,

1608.

[245] Visited in 1875, not since.

[246] Horn and his companions, in the romance of “King Horn,”

disguise themselves as minstrels, and range themselves at the gate of

Rymenhild’s castle:

“Hi yeden bi the gravel

Toward the castel,

Hi gunne murie singe

And makede here gleowinge.

Rymenhild hit gan ihere

And axede what hi were:

Hi sede, hi weren harpurs,

And sume were gigours.

He dude Horn inn late

Right at halle gate,

He sette him on a benche

His harpe for to clenche.”

“King Horn,” ed. J. R. Lumby, Early English Text Society, 1866, l.

1465.

[247] Wordsworth, “The Solitary Reaper.”

[248] “Cursor Mundi,” a Northumbrian poem of the fourteenth century,

edited by R. Morris for the Early English Text Society, vol. v. p.

1651 and vol. i. p. 8.

[249] It began to be customary to read aloud verses too, instead of

singing them. Chaucer foresees that his poem of “Troilus” may be

indifferently read or sung, and he writes, addressing his book:

“So preye I to God, that non myswrite the,

Ne the mys-metere, for defaute of tonge!

And red wher so thow be, or elles songe,

That thow be understonde, God I beseche!”

(“Troilus,” book v., l. 1809.)

[250] “Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight,” ed. R. Morris, Early

English Text Society, 1864, pp. 38, ff.

[251] Brilliantly illuminated manuscripts of romances continued,

however, to multiply; they were very well paid for. Edward III

bought, in 1331, of Isabella of Lancaster, nun of Aumbresbury, a

book of romance for which he paid her £66 13s. 4d., which was an

enormous sum. When the king had this book he kept it in his own

room (Devon’s “Issues of the Exchequer,” 1837, p. 144). Richard II

(ibid. 213) bought a bible in French, a “Roman de la Rose,” and a

“Roman de Perceval” for £28. To give an idea of these prices we must

recall, for example, that a few years before Edward bought his book

of romance, the inhabitants of London entered in the City accounts £7

10s. for ten oxen, £4 for twenty pigs, and £6 for twenty-four swans,

which they had given to the king. Year 1328, Riley’s “Memorials of

London,” 1868, p. 170.

[252] The “Thornton Romances,” edited by J. O. Halliwell for the

Camden Society, pp. 88, 121, 177. The romances in this volume are,

“Perceval,” “Isumbras,” “Eglamour,” and “Degrevant”; the longest

scarcely reaches 3,000 lines, “Isumbras” not 1,000. The manuscript,

which is in Lincoln Cathedral, is a collection containing many other

romances, especially a “Life of Alexander,” a “Mort d’Arthur,” an

“Octavian,” and a “Diocletian,” besides numerous prayers in verse,

recipes for curing toothache, prophecies of the weather, etc.

[253] From Golias, the type of the debauched and gluttonous prelate,

made famous by Latin poems attributed to Walter Map, twelfth century,

ed. Th. Wright, Camden Society, 1841; cf. “The Cambridge Songs,

a Goliard’s song book of the eleventh century,” ed. Karl Breul,

Cambridge, 1916.

[254]

Help me God, my wit es then,

he says himself. “Poems,” ed. T. Hall, Oxford, 1887, p. 21.

[255] “Issues of the Exchequer,” p. 244.

[256] “Extracts from the Municipal Records of the City of York,” by

Rob. Davies, London, 1843, p. 230.

[257] Wardrobe Accounts; “Archæologia,” vol. xxvi. p. 342.

[258] Thomas Wright, “Domestic Manners and Sentiments,” 1862, p. 181.

[259] 40 Ed. III, Devon’s “Issue Rolls of the Exchequer,” p. 188.

[260] See two examples of like cases in the introduction to the

“Issue Roll of Thomas de Brantingham,” p. xxxix.

[261] “Roll of Household Expenses of Richard de Swinfield, Bishop of

Hereford,” ed. J. Webb, Camden Society, 1854–55, vol. i. pp. 152,

155. On the condition of minstrels, jugglers, bear-wards, etc., in

France, see e.g. “Histoire économique de la Propriété, des Salaires

. . . et de tous les Prix,” by Vicomte d’Avenel, Paris, 1914, vol. v.

p. 264, and Bédier, “Les Fabliaux,” 1895, p. 389.

[262] Ed. P. Meyer, in “Revue Critique,” vol. x. (1870), p. 373.

[263] “Piers Plowman,” Text C, pass. xii. ll. 35–39.

[264] “Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight,” ed. R. Morris, Early

English Text Society, 1864, ll. 484, 1652–1656, and 1952. In the same

manner Arthur, after an exploit by Gawain, sits down to table, “Wythe

alle maner of mete and mynstralcie bothe.”

[265] “This indenture, made 5 June in the 3rd year of our sovereign

lord King Henry the fifth since the Conquest, witnesseth that John

Clyff, minstrel, and 17 other minstrels, have received from our said

lord the king, through Thomas, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, treasurer

of England, forty pounds as their wages, to each of them 12d. a day

for a quarter of a year, for serving our said lord in the parts of

Guyenne or elsewhere.” Rymer’s “Fœdera,” ed. 1704–32, year 1415, vol.

ix. p. 260.

[266] The chief of the minstrels of Beverley was called _alderman_.

[L.T.S.]

[267] “Fœdera,” year 1387, vol. vii. p. 555. In Sir John Hawkins’

“History of Music,” London, 1893, vol. i. p. 193, John of Gaunt’s

charter to the king of his minstrels in Tutbury, dated 4 Richard II,

is given at length. [L.T.S.]

[268] “Fœdera,” year 1464, vol. xi. p. 512.

[269] “Issue Roll of Thos. de Brantingham,” ed. Devon, pp. 54–57 and

296–298. These pensions were granted for life.

[270]

“La feumes nous en joie et en depport

Dix jours entiers, atendant le vent nort

Pour nous partir.

Mainte trompette y povoit on oir

De jour, de nuit, menestrelz retentir.”

MS. Harl. 1319, in the British Museum, printed in “Archæologia,” vol.

xx. p. 297.

[271] Of which letters, models have come down to us, “and judging by

the lavish eulogy they employ, the minstrels themselves must have had

a hand in drawing them up.” E. K. Chambers, “The Mediæval Stage,”

Oxford, 1903, 2 vols., i. p. 53; three chapters on minstrels of

great interest and importance, beginning with a bibliography of the

subject, i. 23.

[272] Warton’s “History of English Poetry,” Hazlitt’s edition, 1871,

ii. p. 98. John of Gaunt orders £16 13s. 4d. to be paid to “various

minstrels of his very dear cousin the count of Flanders,” and £65 to

various heralds, etc., of “our most redoubted lord and father, the

king at Eltham.” “John of Gaunt’s Register,” ed. S. A. Smith, 1911,

vol, ii. p. 279. Langland notices the good reception given, when they

were travelling, to the king’s minstrels, in order to please their

master, known to be sensible of these marks of good will.

[273] November 26, 1372. “John of Gaunt’s Register,” ed. S. A. Smith,

1911, ii. 98.

[274] Chambers, ibid. i. 51.

[275] “Piers Plowman,” Text C, pass. viii. l. 97.

[276] See a drawing of such a gallery in a miniature reproduced by

Eccleston, “Introduction to English Antiquities;” London, 1847, p.

221. To the sound of the minstrels’ music four wild men or mummers

are dancing with contortions; sticks lie on the ground, no doubt for

their exercises; a barking dog is jumping between them.

[277] “Album de Villard de Honnecourt,” edited by Lassus and Darcel,

1858, plate I.

[278]

“Si vint de sà Loundres; en un prée

Encontra le roy e sa meisnée;

Entour son col porta soun tabour,

Depeynt de or e riche azour.”

“Le roi d’Angleterre et le jongleur d’Ely,” edited with “La riote

du monde,” by Francisque Michel, Paris, 1834, p. 28.—“_Viola._ Save

thee, friend, and thy music: Dost thou live by thy tabor?” And the

tabor player, in “Twelfth Night” (iii. 1) is the Clown.

[279] At Exeter Cathedral may be seen many of the musical instruments

used in the fourteenth century, sculptured in the “Minstrels’

Gallery,” where angels are performing (see the plate). The

instruments they use have been identified by M. Carl Engel as being:

the cittern, the bag-pipe, the clarion, the rebec, the psaltery,

the syrinx, the sackbut, the regals, the gittern, the shalm, the

timbrel, the cymbals. “Musical Instruments,” South Kensington Museum

Art Handbook, p. 113. [The duties of the court minstrels of Edward IV

are declared in the Black Book of the Orders of that king’s household

(Harl. MS. 610, fol. 23), and their instruments are enumerated; “some

vse trumpetts, some shalmes, some small pipes, some are stringe-men.”

L. T. S.]