THE TEMPLE.
Antiquities in the Temple--The history of the place subsequent to the
dissolution of the order of the Knights Templars--The establishment of
a society of lawyers in the Temple--The antiquity of this society--Its
connexion with the antient society of the Knights Templars--An order
of knights and serving brethren established in the law--The degree of
_frere serjen_, or _frater serviens_, borrowed from the antient
Templars--The modern Templars divide themselves into the two societies
of the Inner and Middle Temple.
"Those bricky towers,
The which on Themme's brode aged back do ride,
Where now the studious lawyers have their bowers;
There whilom wont the Templer Knights to bide,
Till they decayed thro' pride."
There are but few remains of the antient Knights Templars now existing in
the Temple beyond the church. The present Inner Temple Hall was their
antient hall, but it has at different periods been so altered and repaired
as to have lost every trace and vestige of antiquity. In the year 1816 it
was almost entirely rebuilt, and the following extract from "The Report
and Observations of the Treasurer on the late Repairs of the Inner Temple
Hall" may prove interesting, as showing the state of the edifice previous
to that period.
"From the proportions, the state of decay, the materials of the eastern
and southern walls, the buttresses of the southern front, the pointed form
of the roof and arches, and the rude sculpture on the two doors of public
entrance, the hall is evidently of very great antiquity.... The northern
wall appears to have been rebuilt, except at its two extremities, in
modern times, but on the old foundations.... The roof was found to be in a
very decayed and precarious state; many timbers were totally rotten. It
appeared to have undergone reparation at three separate periods of time,
at each of which timber had been unnecessarily added, so as finally to
accumulate a weight which had protruded the northern and southern walls.
It became, therefore, indispensable to remove all the timber of the roof,
and to replace it in a lighter form. On removing the old wainscoting of
the western wall, a perpendicular crack of considerable height and width
was discovered, which threatened at any moment the fall of that extremity
of the building with its superincumbent roof.... The turret of the clock
and the southern front of the hall are only cased with stone; this was
done in the year 1741, and very ill executed. The structure of the turret,
composed of chalk, rag-stone, and rubble, (the same material as the walls
of the church,) seems to be very antient.... The wooden cupola of the bell
was so decayed as to let in the rain, and was obliged to be renewed in a
form to agree with the other parts of the southern front."
"Notwithstanding the Gothic character of the building, in the year 1680,
during the treasurership of Sir Thomas Robinson, prothonotary of C. B., a
Grecian screen of the Doric order was erected, surmounted by lions' heads,
cones, and other incongruous devices."
"In the year 1741, during the treasurership of John Blencowe, esq., low
windows of Roman architecture were formed in the southern front."
"The dates of such innovations appear from inscriptions with the
respective treasurers' names."
This antient hall formed the far-famed refectory of the Knights Templars,
and was the scene of their proud and sumptuous hospitality. Within its
venerable walls they at different periods entertained king John, king
Henry the Third, the haughty legates of Roman pontiffs, and the
ambassadors of foreign powers. The old custom, alluded to by Matthew
Paris,[542] of hanging around the wall the shields and armorial devices of
the antient knights, is still preserved, and each succeeding treasurer of
the Temple still continues to hoist his coat of arms on the wall, as in
the high and palmy days of the warlike monks of old.
At the west end of the hall are considerable remains of the antient
convent of the Knights Templars. A groined Gothic arch of the same style
of architecture as the oldest part of the Temple Church forms the ceiling
of the present buttery, and in the apartment beyond is a groined vaulted
ceiling of great beauty. The ribs of the arches in both rooms are
elegantly moulded, but are sadly disfigured with a thick coating of
plaster and barbarous whitewash. In the cellars underneath these rooms are
some old walls of immense thickness, the remains of an antient window, a
curious fireplace, and some elegant pointed Gothic arches corresponding
with the ceilings above; but they are now, alas! shrouded in darkness,
choked with modern brick partitions and staircases, and soiled with the
damp and dust of many centuries. These interesting remains form an upper
and an under story, the floor of the upper story being on a level with the
floor of the hall, and the floor of the under story on a level with the
terrace on the south side thereof. They were formerly connected with the
church by means of a covered way or cloister, which ran at right angles
with them over the site of the present cloister-chambers, and communicated
with the upper and under story of the chapel of St. Anne, which formerly
stood on the south side of the church. By means of this corridor and
chapel the brethren of the Temple had private access to the church for the
performance of their strict religious duties, and of their secret
ceremonies of admitting novices to the vows of the order. In 9 Jac. I. A.
D. 1612, some brick buildings three stories high were erected over this
antient cloister by Francis Tate, esq., and being burnt down a few years
afterwards, the interesting covered way which connected the church with
the antient convent was involved in the general destruction, as appears
from the following inscription upon the present buildings:
"VETUSTISSIMA TEMPLARIORUM PORTICU IGNE CONSUMTA, ANNO 1678, NOVA HAEC,
SUMPTIBUS MEDII TEMPLI EXTRUCTA ANNO 1681 GULIELMO WHITELOCKE ARMIGERO,
THESAURARIO.
"The very antient portico of the Templars being consumed by fire in the
year 1678, these new buildings were erected at the expense of the Middle
Temple in the year 1681, William Whitlock, esq., being treasurer."
The cloisters of the Templars formed the medium of communication between
the hall, the church, and the cells of the serving brethren of the
order.[543]
During the formation of the present new entrance into the Temple by the
church, at the bottom of the Inner Temple-lane, a considerable portion of
the brickwork of the old houses was pulled down, and an antient wall of
great thickness was disclosed. It was composed of chalk, rag-stone, and
rubble, exactly resembling the walls of the church. It ran in a direction
east and west, and appeared to have formed the extreme northern boundary
of the old convent.
The site of the remaining buildings of the antient Temple cannot now be
determined with certainty.
The mansion-house, (_Mansum Novi Templi_,) the residence of the Master and
knights, who were lodged separately from the serving brethren and ate at a
separate table, appears to have stood at the east end of the hall, on the
site of the present library and apartments of the masters of the bench.
The proud and powerful Knights Templars were succeeded in the occupation
of the TEMPLE by a body of learned lawyers, who took possession of the old
hall and the gloomy cells of the military monks, and converted the chief
house of their order into the great and most antient Common Law University
of England.
For more than five centuries the retreats of the religious warriors have
been devoted to "the studious and eloquent pleaders of causes," a new kind
of Templars, who, as Fuller quaintly observes, now "defend one Christian
from another as the old ones did Christians from Pagans." The modern
Templars have been termed _milites justitiae_, or "_soldiers of justice_,"
for, as John of Salisbury, a writer of the twelfth century, saith, "neque
reipublicae militant soli illi, qui galeis thoracisque muniti in hostes
exercent tela quaelibet, sed et patroni causarum, qui lapsa erigunt,
fatigata reparant, nec minus provident humano generi, quam si laborantium
vitam, spem, posterosque, armorum praesidio, ab hostibus tuerentur." "They
do not alone fight for the state who, panoplied in helmets and
breastplates, wield the sword and the dart against the enemy, for the
pleaders of causes, who redress wrongs, who raise up the oppressed, do
protect and provide for the human race as much as if they were to defend
the lives, fortunes, and families of industrious citizens with the
sword."[544]
"Besides encounters at the bar
Are braver now than those in war,
In which the law does execution
With less disorder and confusion;
Has more of honour in't, some hold,
Not like the new way, but the old,
When those the pen had drawn together
Decided quarrels with the feather,
And winged arrows killed as dead,
And more than bullets now of lead:
So all their combats now, as then,
Are managed chiefly by the pen;
That does the feat, with braver vigours,
In words at length, as well as figures."
The settlement of the lawyers in the Temple was brought about in the
following manner.
On the imprisonment of the Knights Templars, the chief house of the order
in London, in common with the other property of the military monks, was
seized into the king's hands, and was committed to the care of James le
Botiller and William de Basing, who, on the 9th of December, A. D. 1311,
were commanded to hand it over to the sheriffs of London, to be taken
charge of by them.[545] Two years afterwards the Temple was granted to
that powerful nobleman, Aymer de Valence, earl of Pembroke, who had been
one of the leaders of the baronial conspiracy against Piers
Gavaston.[546] As Thomas earl of Lancaster, however, claimed the
Temple by escheat as the immediate lord of the fee, the earl of Pembroke,
on the 3rd of Oct., A. D. 1315, at the request of the king, and in
consideration of other lands being granted to him by his sovereign,
remised and released all his right and title therein to Lancaster.[547]
This earl of Lancaster was cousin-german to the English monarch, and first
prince of the blood; he was the most powerful and opulent subject of the
kingdom, being possessed of no less than six earldoms, with a
proportionable estate in land, and at the time that the Temple was added
to his numerous other possessions he was at the head of the government,
and ruled both the king and country as president of the council. In an
antient MS. account of the Temple, formerly belonging to lord Somers and
afterwards to Nicholls, the celebrated antiquary, apparently written by a
member of the Inner Temple, it is stated that the lawyers "made
composition with the earl of Lancaster for a lodging in the Temple, and so
came hither, and have continued here ever since." That this was the case
appears highly probable from various circumstances presently noticed.
The earl of Lancaster held the Temple rather more than six years and a
half.
When the king's attachment for Hugh le Despenser, another favourite, was
declared, he raised the standard of rebellion. He marched with his forces
against London, gave law to the king and parliament, and procured a
sentence of attainder and perpetual exile against Hugh le Despenser. The
fortune of war, however, soon turned against him. He was defeated, and
conducted a prisoner to his own castle of Pontefract, where king Edward
sat in judgment upon him, and sentenced him to be hung, drawn, and
quartered, as a rebel and a traitor. The same day he was clothed in mean
attire, was placed on a lean jade without a bridle, a hood was put on his
head, and in this miserable condition he was led through the town of
Pontefract to the place of execution, in front of his own castle.[548]
A few days afterwards, the king, whilst he yet tarried at Ponfract,
granted the Temple to Aymer de Valence, earl of Pembroke, by a royal
charter couched in the following terms:--
"Edward by the grace of God, king, &c., to the archbishops, bishops,
abbots, priors, earls, barons, justiciaries, &c. &c., health. Know that on
account of the good and laudable service which our beloved kinsman and
faithful servant Aymer de Valence hath rendered and will continue to
render to us, we have given and granted, and by our royal charter have
confirmed to the said earl, the mansion-house and messuage called the New
Temple in the suburb of London, with the houses, rents, and all other
things to the same mansion-house and messuage belonging, formerly the
property of the Templars, and afterwards of Thomas earl of Lancaster, our
enemy and rebel, and which, by the forfeiture of the same Thomas, have
come into our hands by way of escheat, to be had and holden by the same
Aymer and the heirs of his body lawfully begotten, of us and our heirs,
and the other chief lords of the fee, by the same services as those
formerly rendered; but if the said Aymer shall die without heirs of his
body lawfully begotten, then the said mansion-house, messuage, &c. &c.,
shall revert to us and our heirs."[549]
Rather more than a year after the date of this grant, Aymer de Valence was
murdered. He had accompanied queen Isabella to the court of her father,
the king of France, and was there slain (June 23rd, A. D. 1323) by one of
the English fugitives of the Lancastrian faction, in revenge for the death
of the earl of Lancaster, whose destruction he was believed to have
compassed. His dead body was brought over to England, and buried in
Westminster Abbey at the head of Edmund Crouchback, earl of Lancaster. He
left no issue, and the Temple, consequently, once more reverted to the
crown.[550]
It was now granted to Hugh le Despenser the younger, the king's favourite,
at the very time that the act of parliament (17 Edward II.) was passed,
conferring all the lands of the Templars upon the Hospitallers of St.
John.[551] Hugh le Despenser, in common with the other barons, paid no
attention to the parliament, and held the Temple till the day of his
death, which happened soon after, for on the 24th of September, A. D.
1326, Queen Isabella landed in England with the remains of the Lancastrian
faction; and after driving her own husband, Edward the Second, from the
throne, she seized the favourite, and caused him instantly to be condemned
to death. On St. Andrew's Eve he was led out to execution; they put on him
his surcoat of arms reversed, a crown of nettles was placed on his head,
and on his vestment they wrote six verses of the psalm, beginning, _Quid
gloriaris in malitia_.[552] After which he was hanged on a gallows eighty
feet high, and was then beheaded, drawn, and quartered. His head was sent
to London, and stuck upon the bridge; and of the four quarters of his
body, one was sent to York, another to Bristol, another to Carlisle, and
the fourth to Dover.[553]
Thus perished the last private possessor of the Temple at London.
The young prince, Edward the Third, now ascended the throne, leaving his
parent, the dethroned Edward the Second, to the tender mercies of the
gaolers of Berkeley Castle. He seized the Temple, as forfeited to him by
the attainder of Hugh le Despenser, and committed it to the keeping of the
mayor of London, his escheator in the city. The mayor, as guardian of the
Temple, took it into his head to close the gate leading to the waterside,
which stood at the bottom of the present Middle Temple Lane, whereby the
lawyers were much incommoded in their progress backwards and forwards from
the Temple to Westminster. Complaints were made to the king on the
subject, who, on the 2nd day of November, in the third year of his reign,
wrote as follows to the mayor:
"The king to the mayor of London, his escheator[554] in the same city.
"Since we have been given to understand that there ought to be a free
passage through the court of the New Temple at London to the river Thames,
for our justices, clerks, and others, who may wish to pass by water to
Westminster to transact their business, and that you keep the gate of the
Temple shut by day, and so prevent those same justices, clerks of ours,
and other persons, from passing through the midst of the said court to the
waterside, whereby as well our own affairs as those of our people in
general are oftentimes greatly hindered, we command you, that you keep the
gates of the said Temple open by day, so that our justices and clerks, and
other persons who wish to go by water to Westminster, may be able so to do
by the way to which they have hitherto been accustomed.
"Witness ourself at Kenilworth, the 2nd day of November, and third year of
our reign."[555]
The following year the king again wrote to the mayor, his escheator in the
city of London, informing him that he had been given to understand that
the bridge in the said court of the Temple, leading to the river, was so
broken and decayed, that his clerks and law officers, and others, could no
longer get across it, and were consequently prevented from passing by
water to Westminster. "We therefore," he proceeds, "being desirous of
providing such a remedy as we ought for this evil, command you to do
whatever repairs are necessary to the said bridge, and to defray the cost
thereof out of the proceeds of the lands and rents appertaining to the
said Temple now in your custody; and when we shall have been informed of
the things done in the matter, the expense shall be allowed you in your
account of the same proceeds.
"Witness ourself at Westminster, the 15th day of January, and fourth year
of our reign."[556]
Two years afterwards (6 E. III, A. D. 1333) the king committed the custody
of the Temple to "his beloved clerk," William de Langford, "and farmed out
the rents and proceeds thereof to him for the term of ten years, at a rent
of 24_l._ per annum, the said William undertaking to keep all the houses
and tenements in good order and repair, and so deliver them up at the end
of the term."[557]
In the mean time, however, the pope, the bishops, and the Hospitallers had
been vigorously exerting themselves to obtain a transfer of the property,
late belonging to the Templars, to the order of the Hospital of Saint
John. The Hospitallers petitioned the king, setting forth that the church,
the cloisters, and other places within the Temple, were consecrated and
dedicated to the service of God, that they had been unjustly occupied and
detained from them by Hugh le Despenser the younger, and, through his
attainder, had lately come into the king's hands, and they besought the
king to deliver up to them possession thereof. King Edward accordingly
commanded the mayor of London, his escheator in that city, to take
inquisition concerning the premises.
From this inquisition, and the return thereof, it appears that many of the
founders of the Temple Church, and many of the brethren of the order of
Knights Templars, then lay buried in the church and cemetery of the
Temple; that the bishop of Ely had his lodging in the Temple, known by the
name of the bishop of Ely's chamber; that there was a chapel dedicated to
St. Thomas-a-Becket, which extended from the door of the TEMPLE HALL as
far as the ancient gate of the Temple; also a cloister which began at the
bishop of Ely's chamber, and ran in an _easterly_ direction; and that
there was a wall which ran in a northerly direction as far as the said
king's highway; that in the front part of the cemetery towards the north,
bordering on the king's highway, were thirteen houses formerly erected,
with the assent and permission of the Master and brethren of the Temple,
by Roger Blom, a messenger of the Temple, for the purpose of holding the
lights and ornaments of the church; that the land whereon these houses
were built, the cemetery, the church, and all the space inclosed between
St. Thomas's chapel, the church, the cloisters, and the wall running in a
northerly direction, and all the buildings erected thereon, together with
the hall, cloisters, and St. Thomas's chapel, were sanctified places
dedicated to God; that Hugh le Despenser occupied and detained them
unjustly, and that through his attainder and forfeiture, and not
otherwise, they came into the king's hands.[558]
After the return of this inquisition, the said sanctified places were
assigned to the prior and brethren of the Hospital of Saint John; and the
king, on the 11th of January, in the tenth year of his reign, A. D. 1337,
directed his writ to the barons of the Exchequer, commanding them to take
inquisition of the value of the said sanctified places, so given up to the
Hospitallers, and of the residue of the Temple, and certify the same under
their seals to the king, in order that a reasonable abatement might be
made in William de Langford's rent. From the inquiry made in pursuance of
this writ before John de Shorditch, a baron of the Exchequer, it further
appears that on the said residue of the Temple upon the land then
remaining in the custody of William de Langford, and withinside the great
gate of the Temple, were another HALL[559] and four chambers connected
therewith, a kitchen, a garden, a stable, and a chamber beyond the great
gate; also eight shops, seven of which stood in Fleet Street, and the
eighth in the suburb of London, without the bar of the New Temple; that
the annual value of these shops varied from ten to thirteen, fifteen, and
sixteen shillings; that the fruit out of the garden of the Temple sold for
sixty shillings per annum in the gross; that seven out of the thirteen
houses erected by Roger Blom were each of the annual value of eleven
shillings; and that the eighth, situated beyond the gate of entrance to
the church, was worth four marks per annum. It appears, moreover, that the
total annual revenue of the Temple then amounted to 73_l._ 6_s._ 11_d._, equal
to about 1,000_l._ of our present money, and that William de Langford was
abated 12_l._ 4_s._ 2_d._ of his said rent.[560]
Three years after the taking of this inquisition, and in the thirteenth
year of his reign, A. D. 1340, king Edward the Third in consideration of
the sum of one hundred pounds, which the prior of the Hospital promised to
pay him towards the expense of his expedition into France, granted to the
said prior all the residue of the Temple then remaining in the king's
hands, to hold, together with the cemetery, cloisters, and the other
sanctified places, to the said prior and his brethren, and their
successors, of the king and his heirs, for charitable purposes, for
ever.[561] From the above grant it appears that the porter of the Temple
received sixty shillings and tenpence per annum, and twopence a day wages,
which were to be paid him by the Hospitallers.
At this period Philip Thane was prior of the Hospital; and he appears to
have exerted himself to impart to the celebration of divine service in the
Temple Church, the dignity and the splendour it possessed in the time of
the Templars. He, with the unanimous consent and approbation of the whole
chapter of the Hospital, granted to Brother Hugh de Lichefeld, priest, and
to his successors, guardians of the Temple Church, towards the improvement
of the lights and the celebration of divine service therein, all the land
called Ficketzfeld, and the garden called Cotterell Garden;[562] and two
years afterwards he made a further grant, to the said Hugh and his
successors, of a thousand fagots a year to be cut of the wood of
Lilleston, and carried to the New Temple to keep up the fire in the said
church.[563]
King Edward the Third, in the thirty-fifth year of his reign, A. D. 1362,
notwithstanding the grant of the Temple to the Hospitallers, exercised the
right of appointing to the porter's office and by his letters patent he
promoted Roger Small to that post for the term of his life, in return for
the good service rendered him by the said Roger Small.[564]
It is at this period that the first distinct mention of a society of
lawyers in the Temple occurs.
The poet Chaucer, who was born at the close of the reign of Edward the
Second, A. D. 1327, and was in high favour at court in the reign of Edward
the Third, thus speaks of the MANCIPLE, or the purveyor of provisions of
the lawyers in the Temple:
"A gentil Manciple was there of the TEMPLE,
Of whom achatours mighten take ensemple,
For to ben wise in bying of vitaille.
For whether that he paid or toke by taille,
Algate he waited so in his achate,
That he was aye before in good estate.
Now is not that of God a full fayre grace,
That swiche a lewed mannes wit shal pace,
The wisdome of an hepe of lerned men?"
"Of maisters had he mo than thries ten,
THAT WERE OF LAWE EXPERT AND CURIOUS:
Of which there was a dosein in that hous
Worthy to ben stewardes of rent and lond
Of any lord that is in Englelond,
To maken him live by his propre good,
In honour detteles, but if he were wood,
Or live as scarsly, as him list desire;
And able for to helpen all a shire,
In any cas that mighte fallen or happe;
And yet this manciple sette hir aller cappe."[565]
It appears, therefore, that the lawyers in the Temple, in the reign of
Edward the Third, had their purveyor of provisions as at this day, and
were consequently then keeping commons, or dining together in hall.
In the fourth year of the reign of Richard the Second, A. D. 1381, a still
more distinct notice occurs of the Temple, as the residence of the
_learners_ and the _learned_ in the law.
We are told in an antient chronicle, written in Norman French, formerly
belonging to the abbey of St. Mary's at York, that the rebels under Wat
Tyler went to the Temple and pulled down the houses, and entered the
church and took all the books and the rolls of remembrances which were in
the chests of the LEARNERS OF THE LAW in the Temple, and placed them under
the large chimney and burnt them. ("Les rebels alleront a le TEMPLE et
jetteront les measons a la terre et avegheront tighles, issint que ils
fairont coverture en mal array; et alleront en l'esglise, et pristeront
touts les liveres et rolles de remembrances, que furont en leur huches
deins LE TEMPLE DE APPRENTICES DE LA LEY; et porteront en le haut chimene
et les arderont."[566]) And Walsingham, who wrote in the reign of Henry
the Sixth, about fifty years after the occurrence of these events, tells
us that after the rebels, under Wat Tyler and Jack Straw, had burnt the
Savoy, the noble palace of John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, they pulled
down the place called Temple Barr, where the apprentices or learners of
the highest branch of the profession of the law dwelt, on account of the
spite they bore to Robert Hales, Master of the Hospital of Saint John of
Jerusalem, and burnt many deeds which the lawyers there had in their
custody. ("Quibus perpetratis, satis malitiose etiam locum qui vocatur
Temple Barre, in quo _apprenticii juris_ morabantur _nobiliores_,
diruerunt, ob iram quam conceperant contra Robertum de Hales Magistrum
Hospitalis Sancti Johannis Jerusalem, ubi plura munimenta, quae Juridici in
custodia habuerunt, igne consumpta sunt.")[567]
In a subsequent passage, however, he gives us a better clue to the attack
upon the Temple, and the burning of the deeds and writings, for he tells
us that it was the intention of the rebels to decapitate all the lawyers,
for they thought that by destroying them they could put an end to the law,
and so be enabled to order matters according to their own will and
pleasure. ("Ad decollandum omnes juridicos, escaetores, et universos qui
vel in lege docti fuere, vel cum jure ratione officii communicavere. Mente
nempe conceperant, doctis in lege necatis, universa juxta communis plebis
scitum de caetero ordinare, et nullam omnino legem fore futuram, vel si
futura foret, esse pro suorum arbitrio statuenda.")
It is evident that the lawyers were the immediate successors of the
Knights Templars in the occupation of the Temple, as the _lessees_ of the
earl of Lancaster.
Whilst the Templars were pining in captivity in the dungeons of London and
of York, king Edward the Second paid to their servants and retainers the
pensions they had previously received from the treasury of the Temple, on
condition that they continued to perform the services and duties they had
rendered to their antient masters. On the 26th of November, A. D. 1311, he
granted to Robert Styfford, clerk, for his maintenance in the house of the
Temple at London, two deniers a day, and five shillings a year for
necessaries, provided he did service in the church; and when unable to do
so, he was to receive only his food and lodging. Geoffrey Talaver was to
receive, in the same house of the Temple, three deniers a day for his
sustenance, and twenty shillings a year for necessaries, during the
remainder of his life; also one denier a day for the support of his boy,
and five shillings a year for his wages. Geoffrey de Cave, clerk, and John
de Shelton, were also, each of them, to receive from the same house, for
their good services, an annual pension of forty shillings for the term of
their lives.[568] Some of these retainers, in addition to their various
stipends, were to have a gown of the class of free-serving brethren of the
order of the Temple[569] each year; one old garment out of the stock of
old garments belonging to the brethren;[570] one mark a year for their
shoes, &c.; their sons also received so much _per diem_, on condition that
they did the daily work of the house. These retainers were of the class of
free servants of office; they held their posts for life, and not being
members of the order of the Temple, they were not included in the general
proscription of the fraternity. In return for the provision made them by
the king, they were to continue to do their customary work as long as they
were able.
Now it is worthy of remark, that many of the rules, customs, and usages of
the society of Knights Templars are to this day observed in the Temple,
naturally leading us to conclude that these domestics and retainers of the
antient brotherhood became connected with the legal society formed
therein, and transferred their services to that learned body.
From the time of Chaucer to the present day, the lawyers have dined
together in the antient hall, as the military monks did before them; and
the rule of their order requiring "two and two to eat together," and "all
the fragments to be given in brotherly charity to the domestics," is
observed to this day, and has been in force from time immemorial. The
attendants at table, moreover, are still called _paniers_, as in the days
of the Knights Templars.[571] The leading punishments of the Temple, too,
remain the same as in the olden time. The antient Templar, for example,
for a light fault, was "withdrawn from the companionship of his fellows,"
and not allowed "to eat with them at the same table,"[572] and the modern
Templar, for impropriety of conduct, is "expelled the hall" and "put out
of commons." The brethren of the antient fraternity were, for grave
offences, in addition to the above punishment, deprived of their
lodgings,[573] and were compelled to sleep with the beasts in the open
court; and the members of the modern fellowship have in bygone times, as a
mode of punishment, been temporarily deprived of their chambers in the
Temple for misconduct, and padlocks have been put upon the doors. The
Master and Chapter of the Temple, in the time of the Knights Templars,
exercised the power of imprisonment and expulsion from the fellowship, and
the same punishments have been freely used down to a recent period by the
Masters of the Bench of the modern societies. Until of late years, too,
the modern Templars have had their readers, officers of great dignity,
whose duty it has been to read and expound LAW in the hall, at and after
meals, in the same way as the readers of the Knights Templars read and
expounded RELIGION.
There has also been, in connexion with the modern fellowship, a class of
_associates_ similar to the associates of the antient Templars.[574] These
were illustrious persons who paid large sums of money, and made presents
of plate, to be admitted to the fellowship of the Masters of the Bench;
they were allowed to dine at the Bench table, to be as it were honorary
members of the society, but were freed from the ordinary exercises and
regulations of the house, and had at the same time no voice in the
government thereof.
The conversion of the chief house of the most holy order of the Temple of
Solomon in England into a law university, was brought about in the
following manner.
Both before, and for a very considerable period after, the Norman
conquest, the study of the law was confined to the ecclesiastics, who
engrossed all the learning and knowledge of the age.[575] In the reign of
king Stephen, the foreign clergy who had flocked over after the conquest,
attempted to introduce the ancient civil law of Rome into this country, as
calculated to promote the power and advantage of their order, but were
resolutely resisted by the king and the barons, who clung to their old
customs and usages. The new law, however, was introduced into all the
ecclesiastical courts, and the clergy began to abandon the municipal
tribunals, and discontinue the study of the common law. Early in the reign
of Henry the Third, episcopal constitutions were published by the bishop
of Salisbury, forbidding clerks and priests to practise as advocates in
the common law courts. (_Nec advocati sint clerici vel sacerdotes in foro
saeculari, nisi vel proprias causas vel miserabilium personarum
prosequantur._[576]) Towards the close of the same reign, (A. D. 1254,)
Pope Innocent IV. forbade the reading of the common law by the clergy in
the English universities and seminaries of learning, because its decrees
were not founded on the _imperial constitutions_, but merely on the
_customs of the laity_.[577]
As the common law consequently gradually ceased to be studied and taught
by the clergy, who were the great depositaries of legal learning, as of
all other knowledge in those days, it became necessary to educate and
train up a body of laymen to transact the judicial business of the
country; and Edward the First, who, from his many legal reforms and
improvements, has been styled "the English Justinian," made the practice
of the common law a distinct profession.
In antient times the Court of _Common Pleas_ had the exclusive
administration of the _common law_, and settled and decided all the
disputes which arose between _subject_ and _subject_; and in the twentieth
year of the reign of Edward the First, (A. D. 1292,) the privilege of
pleading causes in this court was confined to a certain number of learned
persons appointed by authority. By an order in council, the king commanded
John de Metingham, chief justice of the Court of Common Pleas, and the
rest of his fellow justices, that they, according to their discretions,
should provide and ordain from every county a certain number of attorneys
and apprentices of the law, of the best and most apt for their learning
and skill, to do service to his court and people, and those so chosen
should follow his court and transact the affairs therein, and _no others_;
the king and his council deeming the number of fourscore to be sufficient
for that employment; but it was left to the discretion of the said
justices to add to that number, or to diminish it, as they should think
fit.[578]
At this period the Court of Common Pleas had been fixed at Westminster,
which brought together the professors of the common law at London; and
about the period of the dissolution of the order of the Temple, a society
appears to have been in progress of formation, under the sanction of the
judges, for the education of a body of learned secular lawyers to attend
upon that court. The deserted convent of the Knights Templars, seated in
the suburb of London, away from the noise and bustle of the city, and
presenting a ready and easy access by water to Westminster, was a
desirable retreat for the learned members of this infant legal society;
and we accordingly find, that very soon after the dissolution of the
religio-military order of Knights Templars, the professors of the common
law of England mustered in considerable strength in the Temple.
In the sixth year of the reign of Edward the Third, (A. D. 1333,) when the
lawyers had just established themselves in the convent of the Temple, and
had engrafted upon the old stock of Knights Templars their infant society
for the study of the practice of the common law, the judges of the Court
of Common Pleas were made KNIGHTS,[579] being the earliest instance on
record of the grant of the honour of knighthood for services purely
civil, and the professors of the common law, who had the exclusive
privilege of practising in that court, assumed the title or degree of
FRERES SERJENS or FRATRES SERVIENTES, so that knights and
serving-brethren, similar to those of the antient order of the Temple,
were most curiously revived and introduced into the profession of the law.
It is true that the word _serviens_, _serjen_, or serjeant, was applied to
the professors of the law long before the reign of Edward the Third, but
not to denote a _privileged brotherhood_. It was applied to lawyers in
common with all persons who did any description of work for another, from
the _serviens domini regis ad legem_, who prosecuted the pleas of the
crown in the county court, to the _serviens_ or _serjen_ who walked with
his cane before the concubine of the Patriarch in the streets of
Jerusalem.[580] The priest who worked for the Lord was called _serjens de
Dieu_, and the lover who served the lady of his affections _serjens
d'amour_.[581] It was in the order of the Temple that the word _freres_
serjens or _fratres_ servientes signified an honorary title or degree, and
denoted a powerful privileged class of men. The _fratres servientes
armigeri_ or _freres serjens des armes_, of the chivalry of the Temple,
were of the rank of gentlemen. They united in their own persons the
monastic and the military character, they were allotted one horse each,
they wore the red cross of the order of the Temple on their breasts,[582]
they participated in all the privileges of the brotherhood, and were
eligible to the dignity of Preceptor. Large sums of money were frequently
given by seculars who had not been advanced to the honour of knighthood,
to be admitted amongst this highly-esteemed order of men.
The _freres serjens_ of the Temple wore linen _coifs_, and red caps close
over them.[583] At the ceremony of their admission into the fraternity,
the Master of the Temple placed the coif upon their heads, and threw over
their shoulders the white mantle of the Temple; he then caused them to sit
down on the ground, and gave them a solemn admonition concerning the
duties and responsibilities of their profession.[584] They were warned
that they must enter upon a new life, that they must keep themselves fair
and free from stain, like the white garment that had been thrown around
them, which was the emblem of purity and innocence; that they must render
complete and perfect obedience to their superiors; that they must protect
the weak, succour the needy, reverence old men, and do good to the poor.
The knights and serjeants of the common law, on the other hand, have ever
constituted a privileged _fraternity_, and always address one another by
the endearing term _brother_. The religious character of the antient
ceremony of admission into this legal brotherhood, which took place in
church, and its striking similarity to the antient mode of reception into
the fraternity of the Temple, are curious and remarkable.
"Capitalis Justitiarius," says an antient MS. account of the creation of
serjeants-at-law in the reign of Henry the Seventh, "monstrabat eis plura
bona exempla de eorum praedecessoribus, et tunc posuit les _coyfes_[585]
super eorum capitibus, et induebat eos singulariter de capital de
skarletto, et sic creati fuerunt _servientes ad legem_." In his admonitory
exhortation, the chief justice displays to them the moral and religious
duties of their profession. "Ambulate in vocatione in qua vocati estis....
Disce cultum Dei, _reverentiam superioris(!), misericordiam pauperi_." He
tells them the coif is sicut vestis _candida_ et immaculata, the emblem of
purity and virtue, and he commences a portion of his discourse in the
scriptural language used by the popes in the famous bull conceding to the
Templars their vast spiritual and temporal privileges, "_Omne datum
optimum et omne donum perfectum desursum est descendens a patre luminum,
&c. &c._!"[586]
The _freres serjens_ of the Temple were strictly enjoined to "eat their
bread in silence," and "place a watch upon their mouths," and the _freres
serjens_ of the law, we are told, after their admission, did "dyne
together with sober countenance and lytel communycacion."
The common-law lawyers, after their location in the Temple, continued
rapidly to increase, and between the reigns of Richard the Second and
Henry the Sixth, they divided themselves into two bodies. "In the raigne
of king Henry the Sixth," says the MS. account of the Temple, written 9
Charles the First, "they were soe multiplied and grown into soe great a
bulke as could not conveniently be regulated into one society, nor indeed
was the old hall capable of containing so great a number, whereupon they
were forced to divide themselves. A new hall was then erected which is now
the Junior Temple Hall, whereunto divers of those who before took their
repast and diet in the old hall resorted, and in process of time became a
distinct and divided society."
From the inquisition taken 10. E. III. A. D. 1337, it appears that in the
time of the Knights Templars there were _two halls_ in the Temple, so that
it is not likely that a fresh one was built. One of these halls, the
present Inner Temple Hall, had been assigned, the year previous to the
taking of that inquisition, to the prior and brethren of the Hospital of
Saint John, together with the church, cloisters, &c., as before mentioned,
whilst the other hall remained in the hands of the crown, and was not
granted to the Hospitallers until 13 E. III. A. D. 1340. It was probably
soon after this period that the Hospitallers conceded the use of _both
halls_ to the professors of the law, and these last, from dining apart and
being attached to different halls, at last separated into two societies,
as at present.
"Although there be two several societies, yet in sundry places they are
promiscuously lodged together without any metes or bounds to distinguish
them, and the ground rooms in some places belong to the new house, and the
upper rooms to the old one, a manifest argument that both made at first
but one house, nor did they either before or after this division claim by
several leases, but by one entire grant. And as they took their diet
apart, so likewise were they stationed apart in the church, viz. those of
the Middle Temple on the left hand side as you go therein, and those of
the old house on the right hand side, and so it remains between them at
this day."[587]
Burton, the antiquary, who wrote in the reign of queen Elizabeth, speaks
of this "old house" (the Inner Temple) as "the mother and most antient of
all the other houses of courts, to which," says he, "I must acknowledge
all due respect, being a fellow thereof, admitted into the same society on
the 20th of May, 1593."[588] The two societies of the Temple are of _equal
antiquity_; the members in the first instance dined together in one or
other of the antient halls of the Templars as it suited their convenience
and inclination; and to this day, in memory of the old custom, the
benchers or antients of the one society dine once every year in the hall
of the other society. The period of the division has been generally
referred to the commencement of the reign of Henry the Sixth, as at the
close of that long reign the present _four_ Inns of Court were all in
existence, and then contained about two thousand students. The Court of
King's Bench, the Court of Exchequer, and the Court of Chancery, had then
encroached upon the jurisdiction of the Common Pleas, and had taken
cognizance of civil causes between subject and subject, which were
formerly decided in that court alone.[589] The legal business of the
country had consequently greatly increased, the profession of the law
became highly honourable, and the gentry and the nobility considered the
study of it a necessary part of education.
Sir John Fortescue, who was chief justice of the King's Bench during half
the reign of Henry the Sixth, in his famous discourse _de laudibus legum
Angliae_, tells us that in his time the annual expenses of each law-student
amounted to more than 28_l._, (equal to about 450_l._ of our present
money,) that all the students of the law were gentlemen by birth and
fortune, and had great regard for their character and honour; that in each
Inn of Court there was an academy or _gymnasium_, where singing, music,
and dancing, and a variety of accomplishments, were taught. Law was
studied at stated periods, and on festival days: after the offices of the
church were over, the students employed themselves in the study of
history, and in reading the Holy Scriptures. Everything good and virtuous
was there taught, vice was discouraged and banished, so that knights,
barons, and the greatest of the nobility of the kingdom, placed their sons
in the Temple and the other Inns of Court; and not so much, he tells us,
to make the law their study, or to enable them to live by the profession,
as to form their manners and to preserve them from the contagion of vice.
"Quarrelling, insubordination, and murmuring, are unheard of; if a student
dishonours himself, he is expelled the society; a punishment which is
dreaded more than imprisonment and irons, for he who has been driven from
one society is never admitted into any of the others; whence it happens,
that there is a constant harmony amongst them, the greatest friendship,
and a general freedom of conversation."
The two societies of the Temple are now distinguished by the several
denominations of the Inner and the Middle Temple, names that appear to
have been adopted with reference to a part of the antient Temple, which,
in common with other property of the Knights Templars, never came into the
hands of the Hospitallers. After the lawyers of the Temple had separated
into two bodies and occupied distinct portions of ground, this part came
to be known by the name of the outward Temple, as being the farthest away
from the city, and is thus referred to in a manuscript in the British
Museum, written in the reign of James the First.--"A third part, called
_outward Temple_, was procured by one Dr. Stapleton, bishop of Exeter, in
the days of king Edward the Second, for a residing mansion-house for him
and his successors, bishops of that see. It was called Exeter Inn until
the reign of the late queen Mary, when the lord Paget, her principal
secretary of state, obtained the said third part, called Exeter-house, to
him and his heirs, and did re-edify the same. After whom the said third
part of the Templar's house came to Thomas late duke of Norfolk, and was
by him conveyed to Sir Robert Dudley, knight, earl of Leicester, who
bequeathed the same to Sir Robert Dudley, knight, his son, and lastly, by
purchase, came to Robert late earl of Essex, who died in the reign of the
late queen Elizabeth, and is still called Essex-house."[590]
When the lawyers came into the Temple, they found engraved upon the
antient buildings the armorial bearings of the Knights Templars, which
were, on a shield argent, a plain cross gules, and (_brochant sur le
tout_) the holy lamb bearing the banner of the order, surmounted by a red
cross. These arms remained the emblem of the Temple until the fifth year
of the reign of queen Elizabeth, when unfortunately the society of the
Inner Temple, yielding to the advice and persuasion of Master Gerard
Leigh, a member of the College of Heralds, abandoned the antient and
honourable device of the Knights Templars, and assumed in its place a
galloping winged horse called a Pegasus, or, as it has been explained to
us, "a horse striking the earth with its hoof, or _Pegasus luna on a field
argent_!" Master Gerard Leigh, we are told, "emblazoned them with precious
stones and planets, and by these strange arms he intended to signify that
the knowledge acquired at the learned seminary of the Inner Temple would
raise the professors of the law to the highest honours, adding, by way of
motto, _volat ad aethera virtus_, and he intended to allude to what are
esteemed the more liberal sciences, by giving them Pegasus forming the
fountain of Hippocrene, by striking his hoof against the rock, as a proper
emblem of lawyers becoming poets, as Chaucer and Gower, who were both of
the Temple!"
The society of the Middle Temple, with better taste, still preserves, in
that part of the Temple over which its sway extends, the widely-renowned
and time-honoured badge of the antient order of the Temple.
The assumption of the prancing winged horse by the one society, and the
retention of the lamb by the other, have given rise to the following witty
lines--
"As thro' the Templars' courts you go,
The lamb and horse displayed,
The emblematic figures show
The merits of their trade.
That clients may infer from hence
How just is their profession;
The lamb denotes their INNOCENCE,
The horse their EXPEDITION.
Oh, happy Britain! happy isle!
Let foreign nations say,
Here you get justice without guile,
And law without delay."
ANSWER.
"Unhappy man! those courts forego,
Nor trust such cunning elves,
The artful emblems only show
Their _clients_, not _themselves_.
These all are tricks,
These all are shams,
With which they mean to cheat ye,
But have a care, for you're the LAMBS,
And they the wolves that eat ye.
Nor let the plea of no delay
To these their courts misguide ye,
For you're the PRANCING HORSE; and they
The jockeys that would ride you!"