CHAPTER X.

SOME ASPECTS OF THE CONVENT IN ENGLAND DURING THE LATER MIDDLE AGES.

‘All that wons in religioun

aw to haue sum ocupacioun,

outher in kirk or hali bedes,

or stodying in oder stedes;

ffor ydilnes, os sais sant paul

es grete enmy unto the soul.’

_Rule of St Benedict translated into English for the use

of women_, 1400-1425 (ll. 1887 ff.).

§ 1. The External Relations of the Convent.

From consideration of affairs on the Continent we return once more to

England, to consider the external relations of the convent and the

purposes these institutions fulfilled during the later Middle Ages.

Speaking generally the monasteries maintained their standing unimpaired

till the beginning of the 14th century; then their character began to

change and for quite a century they ceased to be attractive to progressive

and original minds. The range of occupations cultivated by their inmates

was restricted, and these inmates gradually came to regard everything with

indifference except their own narrow religious interests.

The previous chapters have shown that monasteries at different periods had

served a variety of purposes and had inaugurated progress in various

directions; but after the year 1350 few if any new developments are

recorded. As agricultural centres they continued prosperous on the whole;

the abbot and the abbess retained their character as good landlords;

charity and hospitality continued to be practised by them. But as

intellectual centres the monasteries had found their rival in the growing

townships. The townships at the beginning of the 14th century were so well

established that they were able to protect and further pursuits and

industries which had hitherto flourished under the protection of monastic

centres. Book-learning and science were cultivated in a more liberal

spirit at the universities, where the friars of different orders had

established houses; and the arts and crafts flourished on more fruitful

soil under the protection of the town. The progress of the English nation

during the 14th and 15th centuries is uncontested; but little of it, if

any, was due to the influence of monks. On the whole monasteries continued

to be favourably regarded by the nation, and the system of which they

formed part was not attacked, but while the friar freely moved from city

to city and for a while became the representative of learning and art, the

monk bound to his convent home showed an increasing want of intellectual

activity.

The change was part of the great revolution which was taking place in

feudal institutions generally. The age of chivalry was a thing of the

past, and though the romantic ideas it had engendered had not ceased to

influence mankind, they no longer possessed the transforming power of

innovation. Similarly, mysticism which had been so largely cultivated

inside convent walls had done its work in ushering in a spiritualised

interpretation of religion; during the 14th century it was spread abroad

and popularised by the friars, who gave it a new development, the monk’s

interest in it seemed to cease. But the ceremonial and ritual which the

mystic had helped to elaborate, and the many observances by which the

Catholicism of the Middle Ages had secured a hold on the concerns of daily

life, continued in undisturbed prominence,--with this difference, that

from elevating the few the ritual had now come to impress the many.

It is often insisted on that during the later Middle Ages monasteries were

homes of superstition and idolatry, and that practices in devotional

ritual and in the cult of the miraculous were kept up by them to the

extent of making them a hindrance to moral and intellectual development,

and obnoxious to the advocates of more liberal and advanced views. The

fact must be taken as part of the conservative attitude of these houses,

which had strengthened their hold on outside attention by observances with

which their existence was indissolubly bound up. Certainly a later age may

be excused for condemning what had become a mischief and a hindrance; but

it is well to recall that it was precisely those usages and tendencies

which a later period condemned as superstitious, that had been elaborated

at an early period by leaders in thought, who saw in them the means of

setting forth the principles of the Christian faith. And the elaborate

cult, the processions and imagery of mediæval Christianity, have a deeply

significant side if we think of them in connection with the poetic,

pictorial, dramatic and architectural arts of the later Middle Ages.

Convents retained some importance for the education of women during these

ages. Attention must be given to them in this connection, though the

standard of tuition they offered was not high. Compared with the level

they had reached during an earlier period convents showed signs of

retrogression rather than of advance, and compared with what was

contemporaneously attained at the universities, the training women

received in the convent was poor in substance, cramped in method, and

insufficient in application. But, as far as I have been able to ascertain,

a convent education remained the sole training of which a girl could avail

herself outside the home circle. For the universities absolutely ignored

the existence of woman as a being desirous or capable of acquiring

knowledge, and the teaching at the mediæval university was so ordered that

students ranged in age from the merest boyhood to manhood. These centres

then, by ignoring the existence of women, appropriated to men not only the

privileges of a higher education, but also all knowledge from its

rudiments upwards.

The standard of education in the average nunnery was deteriorating because

devotional interests were cultivated to the exclusion of everything else.

In early Christian times we saw monk and nun promoting intellectual

acquirements generally, but the separation of the sexes, and the growing

feeling in favour of the stricter confinement of nuns within convent

precincts, advocated by a later age in the interests of a stricter

morality, more and more cut off the nun from contact with secular

learning. In the 12th century we saw Queen Matilda, the pupil of a Wessex

house, writing fluent Latin and speaking not only of the Fathers of the

Church but quoting from classical writers of whom she evidently knew more

than the name. But in the later Middle Ages the class of writers who were

read in the convent was restricted; service books, the legends of the

saints, theological works, and some amount of scripture, comprised the

range of the nun’s usual studies. The remarks of contemporary writers bear

out the inferences to be drawn from such a narrowed curriculum of study.

The nun is represented as a person careful in her devotions, pious in her

intent, of good manners and gentle breeding, but one-sided in the view she

takes of life.

The author of the _Ancren Riwle_, as mentioned above, left us to infer

that the women he was addressing were acquainted with English, French, and

Latin, and their education must have been given them in convents. His work

was written in the early half of the 13th century. In all convents down to

the Reformation Latin continued to be studied to some extent, if only so

far as to enable the nun to repeat her prayers, to follow mass and to

transcribe a book of devotion. The lady superior, by the terms of her

appointment and on account of the duties of her station, was bound to have

some knowledge of it. But at the same time one comes across remarks which

lead one to suppose that Latin was falling into disuse in nunneries,

especially in the south of England, and that French was taking its place.

Corroboration of this view is afforded by a list of injunctions sent by

the bishop of Winchester to the convent at Romsey, in consequence of an

episcopal visitation in 1310; they were drawn up in Latin, but a literal

translation into French was appended for the greater convenience of the

nuns[874]. The rules and ordinances prescribed by Archbishop Walter

Reynolds to the convent of Davington in Kent about the year 1326 were

written in French[875], and so were the set of rules forwarded by the

abbot of St Albans to the convent of Sopwell in 1338[876]. On the other

hand injunctions written in Latin were sent to Godstow in Oxfordshire in

1279 and to Nun-Monkton in Yorkshire in 1397.

French down to the middle of the 14th century was the language of the

upper classes as well as the legal language[877], and many literary

products of the time are in French. A ‘Life of St Katherine’ written in

Norman French by Clemence, a nun at Barking, is extant in two MSS. Only

its opening lines have been published in which the nun informs her readers

that she has translated this life from Latin into ‘romans[878].’ Letters

written by ladies superior during this period were usually in French. Thus

the prioress and convent of Ankerwyke in Buckinghamshire addressed a

petition to King Edward III. in French[879], and the abbess of Shaftesbury

in 1382 petitioned King Richard II. in the same language[880]. Various

documents and year-books which were kept in religious houses show that

entries made during the early period were in Latin, but in the 14th

century French frequently occurs. In the 15th century both Latin and

French were abandoned and the use of English became general. The documents

of Barking, a most important Benedictine nunnery, are partly in Latin,

partly in French, and partly in English[881]. The extant charters of Legh

or Minchenlegh in Devonshire are exclusively in Latin, but the rubrics of

the 14th century are in French[882]. In the register of Crabhouse[883], an

Austin settlement of nuns in Norfolk, all three languages are used.

In the nunneries of the south of England French maintained itself longest,

but it was Norman French, which continued in use after the change abroad

which made the French spoken on this side of the Channel (except that of

court circles) sound unfamiliar to a Frenchman. In the Prologue to his

_Canterbury Tales_, written about 1386, Chaucer introduces a prioress who

was one of the pilgrims _en route_ for Canterbury, and remarks on the kind

of French which she spoke (l. 124):

‘And Frenche she spake full fayre and fetisly

After the scole of Stratford atte Bow,

For Frenche of Paris was to hire unknowe.’

Evidently he is referring to the French which was generally in use at the

nunneries. Stratford, otherwise St Leonard’s, Bromley, was situated in

Middlesex.

English was first heard at the opening of the session at Westminster in

1363, and in 1404 French was unintelligible to the English ambassadors in

Flanders. I have come across few French documents relating to nunneries

which are later than the year 1400; in fact a petition in French written

in 1433 by the prioress of Littlemore in Oxfordshire stands almost

alone[884].

There is extant a highly interesting rhymed version of the rule of St

Benedict written for the use of nuns in the English dialect of the north

between 1400 and 1425[885]. It is not the earliest version in English

made for the use of nuns; there is a translation, known as the Winteney

version, which was written for them and is preserved in a copy of the 13th

century; and it is possible that the earliest Benedictine rule in

Anglo-Saxon for monks was adapted from a version in the vernacular written

for women[886]. However the author of the rhymed version of the 15th

century is conscious of women’s comparative ignorance of Latin. He

prefaces his rule with the reason which prompted him to make it. ‘Monks

and learned men,’ he says, ‘may know the rule in Latin and gather from it

how to work, serving God and Holy Church; it is for the purpose of making

it intelligible to women who learnt no Latin in their youth that it is

here set into English that they may easily learn it....’

The name of this translator is unknown. On the ground of certain passages

referring to singing in choir (line 1188 ff.) it has been supposed, but

with slight probability, that the translation was the work of a woman.

Another proof of the growing unfamiliarity with Latin in nunneries is

afforded by the introduction to the register of Godstow, which was one of

the wealthier English Benedictine nunneries. This register was written

under the abbess Alice Henley, who is known to have been ruling in the

year 1464, and consists of 126 folio leaves of vellum. According to

Dugdale[887] it comprises ‘an account of the foundation of the house, an

A. B. C. of devotion, a kalendar of the year, and all the charters of the

house translated into English.’ The translator has left an introduction to

his work which in modern English runs as follows: ‘The wise man taught his

child to read books gladly and to understand them well, for lack of such

understanding has often caused negligence, hurt, harm and hindrance, as

experience proves; and since women of religion in reading Latin books are

excused from much understanding where it is not their mother tongue,

therefore if they read their books of remembrance and of gifts written in

Latin, for want of understanding they often take hurt and hindrance; and

since for want of truly learned men who are ready to teach and counsel

them, and for fear also of publishing the evidence of their titles which

has often caused mischief, it seems right needful to the understanding of

these religious women that they have besides their Latin books some

written in their mother tongue, by which they may secure better knowledge

of their property and more clearly give information to their servants,

rent-gatherers and receivers in the absence of their learned counsellors;

therefore I, a poor brother, and ‘wellwyller’ to the abbess of Godstow

Dame Alice Henley and to all her convent, which are for the most part well

learned in English books ... have undertaken to make this translation for

them from Latin into English.’

I have come across very few references to books which have come from

nunneries. A celebrated manuscript in Latin, which contains a collection

of the lives of the saints and is written on vellum, belonged to the

convent at Romsey[888]; a copy of ‘The life of St Katherine of Alexandria’

by Capgrave (in English verse of the 15th century), which has lately been

printed, is designated as belonging to Katherine Babington, subprioress of

Campsey in Suffolk[889]; and the famous Vernon manuscript which contains

the most complete collection of writings in Middle English on salvation or

‘soul-hele’ probably came from a nunnery.

The inventories taken of the goods and chattels belonging to convents at

the time of the dissolution contain few references to books. Probably only

books of devotion were numerous, and these were looked upon by the nuns as

their personal property like their clothes, and were taken away with them

when they left. The inventory of the nunnery of Kilburn mentions that two

copies of the _Legenda Aurea_, the one written, the other printed, were

kept in the chamber of the church[890]. In connection with Sion, the only

house in England of the order of St Bridget, we shall hear of a splendid

collection of books, all I believe of a devotional character.

An inventory of the goods of the comparatively insignificant priory of

Easebourne in Sussex, which never numbered more than five or six nuns, was

taken in the year 1450 and shows what books of devotion were then in its

possession. The following are enumerated: two missals, two breviaries,

four antiphonies, one large _legenda_ or book of the histories of the

saints, eight psalters, one book of collects, one _tropon_ or book of

chants, one French Bible, two _ordinalia_ or books of divine office, in

French, one book of the Gospels, and one martyrology[891]. It is in

accordance with the exclusively pious training shown by the possession of

books such as these that Chaucer lets his prioress, when called upon to

contribute a tale, recount the legend of a boy-martyr who was murdered at

Alexandria, and the nun who was with her tell the legend of St Cecilia.

The prioress in this case did not fail to impress her hearers, while the

monk, who was also of the party and told of worthies of biblical and of

classical repute, roused no interest.

In the eyes of Chaucer the prioress was a thoroughly estimable person.

‘Madame Eglentine,’ whose smiling was ‘ful simple and coy,’ and who spoke

French fluently, was distinguished also for elegance of manners at table.

She neither dropped her food, nor steeped her fingers in the sauce, nor

neglected to wipe her mouth, and throughout affected a certain courtly

breeding which went well with her station.

‘And sikerly she was of grete disport,

And ful plesant, and amiable of port,

And peined hire to contrefeten chere

Of court, and ben estatelich of manere,

And to ben holden digne of reverence.’

Her sensitiveness was so great that she wept on seeing a mouse caught in a

trap, and the death of one of the small dogs she kept caused her great

grief. She could not bear to see one of them beaten, for in her ‘all was

conscience and tendre herte.’ The only ornament she wore was a brooch

which was attached to her beads and on which were inscribed the words

_Amor vincit omnia_. The poet’s designating her companion as the ‘other

nun,’ suggests that the prioress in this case was a nun herself, that is

that she was not the superior of a priory, but prioress and member of a

convent which was under an abbess.

Education in a nunnery at this period secured the privilege of being

addressed as ‘Madame,’ the title of a woman of the upper classes.

Directions in English about the consecration of nuns which were in use in

the diocese of Lincoln about the year 1480 are in existence[892]. In these

the bishop at the conclusion of the service is directed to offer words of

advice to the newly professed nuns, which begin as follows: ‘Daughters and

virgins, now that you are married and espoused to Him that is above king

and ‘kaysor,’ Jesus Christ, meet it is and so must you from henceforth in

token of the same be called ‘madame or ladye[892].’

Judging from a passage in Chaucer (l. 3940) this privilege was apparently

kept by those who had been educated in a nunnery and returned to the

world. The reeve tells about the miller’s wife who was ‘come of noble kyn;

she was i-fostryd in a nonnerye,’ and on account of her kindred and the

‘nostelry’ she had learned, no one durst call her but ‘Madame.’

* * * * *

It remains to note how far the standing of nunneries was directly affected

in the later Middle Ages by external social and political changes. Various

conditions combined to curtail the privileges of religious houses, which

when once lost were never recovered.

The reign of Edward I (1272-1307) was marked by many legal innovations.

One of the first acts of the king was to appoint a commission to enquire

into jurisdictions, and a general survey of the whole kingdom was taken to

obtain correct knowledge of the rights by which property was held. Local

and manorial rights were throughout called into question, which in many

instances resulted in their being curtailed to the advantage of the king.

In common with other holders of property, the heads of monasteries

incurred direct losses, especially the heads of smaller settlements, where

the property was not so well managed and the superior could not afford to

have a legal adviser.

Among those cited before the justices in eyre were the abbesses and

prioresses of convents of various orders, who as we gather from the

account of these pleas[893] sometimes appeared in person, sometimes

through an attorney, to justify their claims and to seek re-establishment

of their rights. The superiors of smaller settlements, whose property lay

near their house, generally appeared in person, but the superiors of

larger houses, where the jurisdiction over property which lay at a

distance was called into question, appeared by an attorney. Thus the

abbess of Barking which lies in Essex appeared by an attorney at Bedford

and in Buckinghamshire, but in Essex she appeared in person to defend

certain rights connected with property she held at Chelmsford[894]. The

abbess of Malling in Kent appeared by attorney at Canterbury, where she

secured renewal of her rights before the king’s justiciaries not only to

liberties and franchises of the most extensive kind in East and West

Malling, but to the holding of a market twice a week, and of three fairs

in the year[895].

On the other hand we find the prioress of Stratford appearing in person

before the judges in eyre at the Stone Cross, bringing her charters with

her[896]. The prioress of Wroxhall at first refused to answer the summons

to appear at Warwick. Afterwards she appeared in person and succeeded in

establishing her claim to her possessions in Hatton and Wroxhall together

with many privileges and immunities which had been confirmed to her priory

by Henry II, Richard I, John and Henry III, as appears in the charters

granted by those monarchs[897].

But not all were so successful. The prioress of Redlingfield in Suffolk

also came in person to justify a right which was held to belong to the

crown, but which she claimed that she and all her predecessors had held

time out of mind. But as she could show no special warrant, William de

Gyselham prayed judgment for the king. A day was appointed for further

hearing of the case at Westminster, but no further proceedings

appear[898]. Frequently a case was adjourned to Westminster and we hear no

more of it; sometimes also the king’s attorney did not choose to prosecute

his suit further.

A closer analysis of these pleas helps us to understand the various and

complicated rights, immunities and privileges which abbess and prioress

had acquired in common with feudal lords at an early period, and which the

larger houses retained with few abatements down to the time of the

dissolution. The study of these rights shows that a considerable business

capacity and no small amount of attention were required to protect a

settlement against deterioration and decay.

The number of religious houses[899] for women which existed at this

period, including those of all orders, was close upon a hundred and

thirty. Their number can be estimated only approximately, because some

fell to decay and were abandoned as we shall see later, while, regarding

Gilbertine settlements, it is unknown at what period nuns ceased to

inhabit some of them. The number of monasteries for men including those of

all monkish and canonical orders, at the same period was over four

hundred; while the friars, the number of whose houses fluctuated, at the

time of the dissolution owned about two hundred houses.

Of the settlements of nuns eighty-two belonged to the order of St

Benedict, and twenty-seven (including two houses which had been founded by

the order of Cluni) to Cistercian nuns. Fourteen houses were inhabited by

Austin nuns or canonesses (including Sion), and two by nuns of the order

of Prémontré.

In England only the orders of friars of St Francis and St Dominic had

houses for women attached to them. The nuns of the order of St Clare,

called also Poor Clares or Nuns Minoresses, had been established in

connection with the Franciscan friars, and owned three houses, of which

the house in London, known as the Minories, was of considerable

importance. Only one house of Dominican nuns existed in England. The nuns

both of the Dominican and the Franciscan orders differed in many

particulars from other nuns and are usually spoken of not as nuns but as

sisters[900]. They observed strict seclusion, and as a rule took no

interest in anything save devotion. A set of rules for the nuns of St

Clare was written by St Francis himself, and gives a fair idea of the

narrow interests to which women who embraced religion under his auspices

were confined[901].

Regarding the wealth of the settlements of different orders, the houses of

the Benedictine order owned most property and drew the largest incomes;

the houses owned by monks were throughout wealthier than those owned by

nuns. Judging by the computations made at the time of the dissolution the

Cistercian houses for men, and the houses of Austin and of Premonstrant

Canons, were comparatively rich, whereas the houses of Cistercian and of

Premonstrant nuns were poor, but the income of the Austin nunnery,

Buckland in Somersetshire, compared favourably with that of the wealthier

Benedictine houses for women. We shall have occasion to speak more fully

of the house of Sion, which was of the order of St Bridget, and the wealth

of which at the time of the dissolution exceeded that of any other

nunnery.

§ 2. The Internal Arrangements of the Convent.

At this point of our enquiry it seems well to pause for a while to

describe the inner arrangements of a nunnery as they present themselves

during the later Middle Ages, the offices which fell to the several

members of the convent, and the daily life of the nun. The material at the

disposal of the student lies scattered in the convent registers, in the

accounts of visitations, and in contemporary literature, and is

supplemented by the study of ruins. The inventories of monasteries made

during the reign of Henry VIII at the time of the dissolution (c.

1536-1538) further add to this information. For no religious settlement

for women was founded after the death of Edward III (1377) with the sole

exception of Sion, and no important changes were made in the routine of

existing houses, so that the state of things which survived at the

dissolution may be taken with slight reservations as supplementing our

information concerning the arrangements during the earlier period.

Regarding the position and duties of the lady superior, it has been

mentioned before[902] that comparatively few of the Benedictine nunneries

had the standing of abbeys, most of them being priories, and that the

abbesses of four houses had the additional title of baroness by reason of

the property they held of the king. They were called upon to fulfil duties

in accordance with their station, and like secular barons found knights

for the king’s service. In 1257 Agnes Ferrar, abbess of Shaftesbury, was

summoned to Chester to take part in the expedition against Llewellin ap

Griffith, and again in 1277 Juliana Bauceyn was summoned for a like

purpose[903].

The lady superior of a house in the 14th and 15th centuries was frequently

seen outside the convent; pleasure as well as business might take her from

home. It has been mentioned that the heads of convents sometimes appeared

in person before the justices in eyre. Dame Christina Basset, prioress of

the Benedictine nunnery of St Mary Prée in Hertfordshire, in the account

of her expenditure between 1487-1489 had the following entry made: ‘when I

rode to London for the suit that was taken[904].’ In 1368 the bishop of

Sarum, in whose diocese Shaftesbury was, granted a dispensation to Joan

Formage to go from her monastery to one of her manors to take the air and

to divert herself[905]. Complaints were made of the too frequent absence

of their prioress by members of the Benedictine nunnery of Easebourne, at

the visitation in 1441, when it was alleged that the prioress was in the

habit of riding about and staying away on pretence of business more often

than was deemed advantageous to the convent[906].

After her election by the convent, the lady superior made profession of

canonical obedience to the bishop of her diocese and in some cases waited

upon the patron of her house. The nunnery of St Mary’s, Winchester, was

one of the houses that held of the king. In 1265 Eufemia was received by

Henry III, and her successor Lucia went to Winchester castle to be

presented[907]. In houses which held of the king it was part of the royal

prerogative that on his coronation the king should recommend a nun to the

convent. In connection with Shaftesbury we find this on record in the

first year of Richard II (1377-1399) and again in the first of Henry V. In

1428, several years after the accession of Henry VI, who became king when

a child, a royal mandate was issued to the abbess of Shaftesbury to admit

Joan Ashcomb as a nun[908]. And in 1430 the same king nominated Godam

Hampton to be received as a nun at Barking[909].

All the versions of the Benedictine rule known to me speak of the head of

the monastery as the abbot, and in the Winteney version, which was written

for nuns in the 13th century, the head of the women’s house is accordingly

designated as abbess[910]. But, probably because the number of abbesses

was comparatively small, the translator of the rule of St Benedict, in the

rhymed English version of the 15th century, speaks throughout of the

prioress as head of the nunnery[911]. It is the prioress (l. 337 ff.) who

is to be honoured inside the abbey (sic) and out of it wherever she goes

or rides, who shall be law in herself, who shall have no pride in her

heart but ever love God, and who is responsible as a shepherd or herdsman

for the women given into her care. All these injunctions are given in

other versions of the rule to the abbot or abbess. It further says that

the prioress shall not favour any one nun by letting her travel more than

the rest,--a command evidently added by the translator. In another passage

(l. 2116 ff.) closely following the original text it is enjoined that the

prioress shall liberally entertain guests, but if it happens that there be

none, she shall invite some of the older sisters to dine with her.

A detailed account is preserved of the formalities of the appointment of a

prioress to the convent of St Radegund’s at Cambridge[912]. This

settlement, founded about the middle of the 12th century, had experienced

many vicissitudes, but was comparatively prosperous in the year 1457, when

the death of the prioress, Agnes Seyntel, on September 8th, left its

twelve inmates without a head. We gather from a charter that the first

step taken after her demise was that the subprioress, Matilda Sudbury, and

the convent sent information to the bishop of Ely asking for permission to

appoint a successor. This being granted the nuns assembled on Sept. 23rd

and fixed the 27th as the day of the election. On this day all the nuns

were present at mass, and then three of them were chosen arbiters

(_compromissarias_). These were Joan Lancaster, Elizabeth Walton and

Katherine Sayntlow, who took the oath and gave their votes, and then they

administered the oath to the other nuns, who gave their votes also. The

form of administration of the oath and the oath itself are both given in

Latin. The nuns were adjured ‘by the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost,

at the peril of their soul, according to God and their conscience, to name

and choose her as prioress who was most needful to the priory.’ The form

of oath corresponds to this adjuration.

The votes being then counted it was found that a majority of seven were in

favour of the appointment of Joan Lancaster, whereupon Elizabeth Walton,

being called upon by the others, declared the result of the election. The

_Te Deum_ was then sung and the prospective prioress, reluctantly in this

case it seems, was led to the chief altar of the convent church, where she

was left, while the result of the election was proclaimed to the people

outside ‘in the vulgar tongue.’ All this happened before noon, when the

nuns returned to the chapter-house and called upon Elizabeth Walton and

Katherine Sayntlow to draw up the deeds of the election, and to lay them

before the newly appointed prioress, who was requested to affirm her

election at four o’clock in the vestibule of the church. After much

persuasion Joan Lancaster yielded and accepted the election. The words of

her speech are given; in them she declares that she is a free woman and

legitimate, born in lawful wedlock, and therefore entitled to proffer her

consent and assent. Eleven nuns put their signatures to this document, one

of whom designates herself as subprioress and president, another as leader

of the choir, _succentrix_, another as cellaress, _celeraria_, and another

calls herself treasurer, _thesaurissa_.

In connection with the Benedictine convent of Langley, in Leicestershire,

a further formality is recorded at the election of a new prioress. The

permission of the patron of the house having been obtained, the nuns

proceeded to elect a new prioress, and a page with a white staff sent by

the patron guarded the door of the priory till the election was made. ‘For

which in right of his master he was to have his diet but nothing

more[913].’

The form of consent by which an abbess accepted office is entered in the

register of Bishop Lacy of Exeter. In 1449 Johan or Jane Arundell was

appointed abbess of the Austin settlement of Legh or Canonlegh, in

Devonshire[914]. Her consent is drawn up in English, and in it she speaks

of herself as sister Johan Arundell, _mynchyn_, an ancient word for nun

which continued in use in the south of England till the time of the

dissolution.

A previous chapter has shown that the appointment of a prioress in those

nunneries which were cells to an abbey, depended on the abbot[915]. In the

houses which were independent and elected their own head, a licence from

the bishop had to be secured. And if the nuns neglected to secure this

licence before electing a superior difficulties were apt to occur. In the

case of Catesby, a Benedictine house in Northamptonshire, such

difficulties are repeatedly recorded. At the death of the prioress Johanna

de Northampton (1291), the cellaress of the house was elected in her stead

by the nuns; but the election having been made without a licence, the

bishop of Lincoln declared it void. Afterwards however he confirmed it in

consideration of the merits of the person elected. At her death similar

neglect on the one side was followed by similar opposition on the other;

the bishop first declared the election void and then confirmed it. The

relation of Catesby to the diocesan continued to be a source of

difficulties. In 1444 the prioress Agnes Terry was suspended from the

conduct of all business relating to the revenues of the house during the

bishop’s pleasure, and a commission was granted to the abbot of St James

in Northampton to inspect the accounts of the nunnery[916].

Sometimes neglect of the administration of the property of the house was

the cause of the voluntary or forced resignation of a superior. Love of

finery is represented as the cause of the ruin of the prioress Juliana of

Bromhall in Berkshire, into whose conduct an enquiry was instituted in

1404. It was found on this occasion that she ‘had injured the convent and

her own character in that she had converted to her nefarious use,

alienated and wasted chalices, books, jewelry (_jocalia_), the income and

possessions’ of the priory[917]. She resigned, but it is not recorded

whether she remained in the house. In several instances a deposed lady

superior did remain in the convent. Thus Margaret Punder, prioress of

Flixton, an Austin convent, resigned because of complaints of her

negligence, but she remained in the house as a member of the convent[918].

The dignitaries of the Church took upon themselves to protect the abbess

or prioress against violation of her rights by laymen; under social

arrangements which made the nunnery the one place of safety for the

unmarried daughters of the gentry, it is obvious that ecclesiastical and

lay authorities would be of one mind in severely punishing those who

failed to respect the nun’s privileges.

In 1285 a knight carried off two nuns from the settlement at Wilton,

‘which coming to the archbishop’s ears he first excommunicated him, and

subsequently absolved him on these conditions,--first that he should never

afterwards come within a nunnery or be in the company of a nun; then that

on three Sundays running he should be whipped in the parish church of

Wilton, and likewise three other days in the market and church of

Shaftesbury; that he should fast a certain number of months; that he

should not wear a shirt for three years; and lastly that he should not

any more take the habit and title of a knight, but wear apparel of a

russet colour until he had spent three years in the Holy Land[919].’

Where an abbess was at the head of a nunnery, the prioress and

sub-prioress, and sometimes a second prioress and sub-prioress were

appointed by her; where the settlement was ruled by a prioress it was she

who appointed the sub-prioress. This is in accordance with the written

rule of St Benedict, where the abbot nominates the _praepositus_ or

provost whose duties correspond to those of the prioress or

sub-prioress[920]. The rhymed version of the rule, in which the prioress

is treated as chief in authority, says the sub-prioress (l. 1406 ff.)

shall be appointed by the prioress, ‘for if it were done otherwise strife

and debate might easily arise.’ This provision was dictated by the feeling

that, if chosen by the convent, the person second in authority might

presume. For this reason ‘the sub-prioress, sexton and other such officers

shall not be chosen but appointed as the prioress desires,’ and if the

sub-prioress does wrong and refuses to mend her ways ‘out of the flock she

shall be fled.’

The duties of the person second in authority consisted in seeing that the

hours of divine service were rightly kept. A manuscript now at Oxford,

written in English, which came from Barking nunnery gives directions as to

the formal appointment of the prioress in that house[921]. It belongs to

the end of the 14th century. Barking it will be remembered was one of the

chief abbeys for women. The manner in which the abbess appointed the

person second to her in authority is described in the following passage:

‘When a prioress is to be made, the abbess shall commend the rule to her,

enjoining that she be helpful to her and maintain religion in accordance

with the rule. And she shall set her in her seat. And then shall come the

chaplain with incense towards her. And the abbess and she shall go before

the convent into the choir. And then shall they go to St Alburgh, and the

convent shall say the _Levavi_ (Ps. 121, _Levavi oculos meos_, ‘I lifted

up my eyes’); and the prioress shall lie prostrate, and the abbess shall

say the prayers aforesaid with the orison _Oremus_, etc. Then shall the

prioress go to the choir; the chapter mass being _Spiritus Domini_. And

the same day shall be given to the convent a pittance or allowance of

good fish. And when she dies, she must give to the convent....’ Here the

manuscript closes abruptly.

In houses of the Benedictine order the lady superior of the house, whether

abbess or prioress, usually dwelt apart from the convent in a set of

chambers or a small house of her own, where she received visitors and

transacted business. In some of the largest houses the prioress,

sub-prioress and sexton also had establishments of their own as we shall

see presently. In Cistercian houses the arrangements seem to have varied,

but in the majority of houses of the order, usually among Austin nuns and

always among the nuns of St Clare, the head of the house lived in closer

contact with the members of her convent and took her meals at the same

table as the nuns.

The lady superior managed all the business of the house and presided at

the meetings of the convent, the members of which fulfilled a number of

functions which we will pass in rapid review. The full complement of

offices was of course found in the larger houses only; in the smaller

houses several posts were frequently held by one and the same person.

Reference is most frequently made to the offices of sexton, cellaress, and

chaplain,--these seem to have existed in almost every house.

The rhymed version of St Benedict’s rule gives the following injunctions

about the duties of the sexton (l. 1521 ff.):--‘She shall ring the bells

to all the services night and day, and keep the ornaments of the church,

the chalice, books, vestments, relics, and wax and annual rents. She shall

preserve the vessels of the altar and keep them clean.’

Other versions of the rule, as far as I am aware, contain nothing about

these duties. The sexton at Barking at the time of the Reformation was

responsible for the receipt of considerable sums[922].

Duties of great importance devolved on the cellaress, who managed the

receipts and expenditure appertaining to the food; certainly no light task

and one that required considerable powers of management. On this point the

versified rule of St Benedict closely follows the original rule. We are

told (l. 1467 ff.) that the cellaress ‘shall be chosen by counsel out of

the community’; she shall be wise and gentle and of mild ways, not hard

like a shrew, nor slow nor mean in her dealings (grochand in hir dede),

but gladly do her office and take special care of young children, poor

guests and others that ask at her door, knowing that on the day of

judgment she will have to render account.

Fortunately we are in possession of an extremely interesting document

written in English about the year 1400. It came from Barking nunnery, and

enables us to form some idea of the duties devolving on the

cellaress[923]. It is entitled ‘Charthe longynge to the office of the

celeresse,’ and describes the duties of buying and selling, illustrating

the economic condition of the house no less than the standard of living at

that convent. From the manuscript the inference can be drawn that more

than one cellaress was appointed at a time. The one whose duties are

described in the ‘Charthe’ provides and deals out the food, and manages

the receipts from the home farm. The ‘Charthe’ opens with injunctions how

the cellaress, when she comes into office, must look after what is owing

to the office by divers farmers and rent-gatherers and see that it be paid

as soon as may be. A list follows of the sums she receives annually from

various sources,--farms and rent for various tenements in London and

elsewhere. She receives ‘of the canons of St Paul’s in London for a yearly

rent by the year 22 shillings; and of the prior of the convent of St

Bartholomew’s in London by the year 17 shillings.’ The following entries

are curious. ‘She should receive yearly of a tenement in Friday Street,

London, but it is not known where it stands, 23 shillings and four pence;

and she should receive 30 shillings of the rent of Tyburn, but it is not

paid.’

A list follows of the things she is to be charged with, from which it is

evident that the duties of selling as well as of buying devolved on her.

She is to be charged with the ox-skins she sells, also with the ‘inwards’

of oxen, and with tallow and messes of beef; ‘and all these be called the

issues of the larder.’ If she sells hay from any farm belonging to her

office, she must charge herself with it or let it be called ‘the foreign

receipt.’

She is then directed as to the stores she has to provide, which may be

grouped under the headings of grain, flesh, fish, and condiments.

The grains include malt, of which she provides three quarters yearly for

the ‘tounes’ of St Alburgh and Christmas, and she pays twenty pence to the

brewer of each ‘toune’;--and wheat, of which a quarter and seven bushels

are required, which go to the allowance or pittance of the four men and

dames resident in the monastery, for making ‘russeaulx,’ perhaps some

kind of cake, during Lent, and for baking eels on Shere Tuesday (Tuesday

preceding Good Friday). She provides two bushels of peas every year in

Lent, and one bushel of beans for the convent against Midsummer. Both peas

and beans are evidently dried.

Under the heading ‘buying of store’ the only item she is mentioned as

providing is twenty-two oxen a year, which she evidently feeds on her

pasture. Another passage tells us that ‘she shall slay but every fortnight

if she be a good housewife.’ A passage further on refers to her buying

pigs and possibly sheep. Geese and fowls she apparently received from her

own farm.

She buys fish in large quantities, principally herrings, some white,--that

is fresh or slightly salted, some red,--that is salted, by the cade or by

the barrel. A note at the end of the ‘Charthe’ states that a cask or ‘cade

of herrings is six hundred herrings,’ ‘the barrel of herrings is one

thousand herrings.’ Seven cades of white herrings and three barrels of the

same she buys for Lent.

Also she must provide eighteen salt fish and fourteen or fifteen salt

salmon for the convent in Lent. Eels are mentioned, but not that she

bought them; no doubt they were caught on the convent property.

Of condiments the cellaress has to provide almonds, twelve lbs. for Lent;

figs, three pieces[924] and twenty-four lbs.; raisins, one piece; rice,

twenty-eight lbs.; and mustard eight gallons. There is no mention of salt

or of sugar as being provided for the nuns.

We are next informed of the cellaress’ expenses in money. Here the

peculiar word ‘russeaulx’ figures again, variously spelt. All the ladies

of the convent, who at the time numbered thirty-six, are in receipt of

‘ruscheauw sylver,’ payable sixteen times in the year, ‘but it is paid

only twice now, at Easter and at Michaelmas.’ The ladies also receive

twopence each for crisps and crumcakes at Shrovetide. Wherever there is

question of paying money or providing food in portions, the cellaress has

to give double to the chief officers of the house, such as the prioress,

the cellaress, etc., which suggests that they had a double ration either

to enable them to feed their servant, or perhaps a visitor.

The cellaress further pays five annuities called ‘anniversaries,’ namely,

to Sir William, vicar, to Dame Alice Merton, to Dame Maud, the king’s

daughter, to Dame Maud Loveland, and to William Dunn, who are residing in

the monastery. William Dunn moreover receives twelve gallons of good ale

with his annuity.

In ‘offerings and wages’ the cellaress shall pay twelve pence to the two

cellaresses; to the steward of the household what time he brings money

home from the courts 20 pence, and again at Christmas 20 pence; to my

lady’s (the abbess’) gentlewoman 20 pence; ‘to every gentleman 16 pence

and to every yeoman as it pleases her to do, and grooms in like case.’ The

abbess receives a sugar-loaf at Christmas; her clerk is paid thirteen

shillings and fourpence, her yeoman cook 26 shillings and eightpence for

their wages. Her groom cook and her pudding wife (grom coke and poding

wief) receive the gift of one gown a year of the value of two shillings.

A description follows of the food which the cellaress has to provide for

the convent on special days in the year. ‘A pece of whete’ and three

gallons of milk for ‘frimete on St Alburgh’s day’; four bacon hogs twice

in winter, ‘and she must buy six grecys (young pigs), six sowcys (perhaps

‘sowkin,’ diminutive for young female hog, or else ‘sowthes,’ Middle

English for sheep) for the convent and also six inwardys and 100 (?) egges

to make white puddings’; also bread, pepper and saffron for the same

puddings, also three gallons of good ale for ‘besons.’ Other directions

follow which are perplexing, such as ‘mary bones to make white

wortys’--can it be marrowbones to make white soup, or does ‘bones’ stand

for buns? Again we hear of ‘cripcis and crumcakes,’ chickens, bonnes

(buns?) at Shrovetide, and of ‘12 stubbe elles and 60 shafte[925] elles,’

to bake for the convent on Shere Thursday. When the abbess receives a

bottle of Tyre (wine) at Easter time the convent receives two gallons of

red wine. The convent receives three gallons of ale every week. Regarding

the wine it is well to recall that grapes were grown to some extent in

mediæval England, and that after the dissolution, a vineyard of five acres

is scheduled as part of the possessions of Barking nunnery[926].

A paragraph is devoted to the giving out of eggs. The thirty-seven ladies

sometimes receive money instead of eggs, ‘ey sylver,’ as it is called; in

one case the alternative is open to the cellaress of giving thirty-two

eggs or of paying twopence. Butter also forms an important item in the

‘Charthe’; it is given out in ‘cobbets,’ three cobbets going to a dish.

It likewise falls to the cellaress to hire pasture, to see to the mowing

of her hay, to see that all manner of houses within her office be duly

repaired, not only within the monastery but without, on her farms and

manors.

The ‘Charthe’ returns to directions about food, and mentions among other

things pork, mutton, geese, hens, bacon and oatmeal.

The following passages will give some idea of the language in which these

directions are couched.

‘And the under-celaress must remember at each principal feast, that my

lady (the abbess) sits in the refectory, that is to wit five times in the

year, at each time shall (she) ask the clerk of the kitchen (for) supper

eggs for the convent, at Easter, Whitsuntide, the Assumption of Our Lady,

at St Alburgh, and at Christmas; at each time to every lady two eggs, and

each (person receiving) double that is the prioress, celaress and

kitchener....’

‘Also to remember to ask of the kitchen at St Alburgh’s time, for every

lady of the convent half a goose ... also to ask at the said feast of St

Alburgh of the said clerk for every lady of the convent one hen, or else a

cock.’ The manuscript, which is corrected in several places and has

additions made by another hand, closes abruptly.

It is interesting to compare the directions about food found in the rule

of St Benedict with the high standard of living suggested by the ‘Charthe’

of Barking. The rhymed version says (l. 1620) that she who is seeing to

the kitchen shall provide each day two kinds of ‘mete,’ so that she who

will not eat of one kind may take the other. The convent is also to be

supplied with two kinds of pottage (thick soup?) daily. If they have

apples of their own growing they shall partake of them; also each lady is

to be given a pound of bread each day, which is to serve her for her three

meals. The rule adds words to the effect that the ‘celerer’ may give an

extra allowance of food if she sees need though always with caution for

fear of gluttony. In regard to drink, wine and ale shall be ‘softly’

tasted.

It appears probable from this ‘Charthe’ to the cellaress that the office

of Kitchener at Barking was a permanent appointment, which is curious

considering that in an ordinary way the members of the convent were bound

to serve in the convent kitchen as cook, each for the term of a week. The

injunction is repeated in every version of the Benedictine rule known to

me. According to the rhymed version of the north the nun who has served

her term in the kitchen is directed to leave the kitchen and the vessels

clean for her who succeeded her in office. When her time is up she shall

kneel before the assembled members of the convent saying, ‘Blessed be the

Lord that has never failed me,’ whereupon the nun who is to act as cook

shall say, ‘Lord, to my helping take thou heed.’ But this injunction was

evidently disregarded in the wealthier houses at a later date, for in

connection with St Mary’s, Winchester, we read of a convent-cook and an

under convent-cook[927]. A nun of Campsey, an Austin house consisting at

the time of a prioress and eighteen nuns, complained at the visitation of

the house in 1532 of the unpunctuality of the meals, which she ascribed to

the fault of the cook (culpa coci),--using a term which suggests that the

cook in this case was a man[928].

An appointment in the nunnery which has led to some controversy is that of

chaplain, it being alleged by some writers that the chaplain of the

convent was necessarily a man. Certainly in most houses, especially in the

wealthier ones, there were men chaplains; for example at the nunnery of

Shaftesbury, where men chaplains are mentioned by the side of the abbess

in various early charters and played an important part[929]. Again at St

Mary’s, Winchester, at the time of the dissolution, men chaplains were

among those who are described as resident in the monastery[930]; at

Kilburn nunnery the fact that the chaplain who dwelt on the premises was a

man is evident from the arrangement of the dwellings,--three chambers

which lie together being designated as set apart for the chaplain and the

hinds or herdsmen[931]. But the fact that the chaplain’s office could be

and was held by a woman is established beyond a doubt by the following

information. In consequence of an episcopal visitation (1478) of the

Benedictine convent of Easebourne, injunctions were sent to the prioress,

one of which directs that ‘every week, beginning with the eldest,

excepting the sub-prioress, she shall select for herself in due course and

in turns one of her nuns as chaplain (capellanissam) for divine service

and to wait upon herself[932].’ This injunction is in accordance with the

words of Chaucer, who says that the prioress who was on a pilgrimage to

Canterbury had with her a nun who acted as chaplain to her (l. 163):

‘Another Nonne also with hire hadde she

That was hire chapelleine, and preestes thre.’

In the accounts of visitations in the diocese of Norwich between 1492 and

1532 the designation chaplain applied to an inmate of a nunnery appears in

the Benedictine house of Redlingfield, in the Austin priory of Campsey and

in others. In Redlingfield at the visitation of 1514 the complaint is made

against the prioress that she does not change her chaplain, and at Flixton

in 1520 it is alleged that the prioress has no chaplain and sleeps by

herself in her chamber away from the dormitory[933]. At Elstow in

Bedfordshire at the time of the surrender Katheryne Wyngate adds the

designation ‘chapellain’ to her name[934], and among the nuns of Barking

who were still in receipt of their pension in 1553 was Mathea Fabyan who

is styled chaplain (capellan)[935]. How far the woman chaplain performed

the same offices as the man chaplain seems impossible to tell; probably

she recited the inferior services in the chapel of the nunnery.

In the rhymed version of the rule of St Benedict the office of chaplain is

passed over, but in the poem of the ‘Spiritual Convent’ written by the

beguine Mechthild, of which a former chapter has given an account, the

chaplain is a woman. And similarly the English version of this poem called

the ‘Ghostly Abbey’ which is attributed to John Alcock, bishop of Ely (†

1500), refers to women chaplains. It says God had ordered His four

daughters to come and dwell in the abbey; Charity was made abbess and to

her Mercy and Truth were to be as ‘chapeleyns,’ going about with her

wherever she goes. He bade also that Righteousness should be with Wisdom

who was prioress, and Peace with Mekeness who was sub-prioress, Charity,

Wisdom and Mekeness having chaplains because they were ‘most of

worship[936].’

I have found very little information about the arrangements made in the

nunnery for the young people who boarded with and were taught by the nuns,

and hardly a clue is to be had as to the number of those who might stay

in one house at the same time. The only allusion on this point is to St

Mary’s, Winchester, where twenty-six girls, mostly daughters of knights,

were staying at the time of the dissolution. Rogers refers to a roll of

expenditure of the Cistercian priory, Swine, in Yorkshire, on which he

says are enumerated a number of young persons, daughters of the

surrounding gentlefolk, who lived ‘en pension’ in this small

community[937]; and Rye has compiled a list of those who boarded at Carrow

at different times[938]. From ‘The Death of Philip Sparrow,’ a poem

written by John Skelton († 1529), we gather that the girl who is

represented as intoning the lament over a tame bird, lived and boarded

with the ‘Nuns Black’ at Carrow, where her sparrow was devoured by the

cat, whereupon she took out a sampler and worked the sparrow in stitches

of silk for her solace[939]. Apparently not only girls, but boys also,

were given into the care of nuns, for injunctions forwarded to Romsey in

1310 by the bishop of Winchester forbade that boys and girls should sleep

with the nuns or be taken by them into the choir during divine

service[940]. Injunctions sent to Redlingfield in 1514 also directed that

boys should not sleep in the dormitory[941]; and Bishop Kentwode in the

directions he sent to St Helen’s in London ordered that none but ‘mayd

learners’ should be received into that nunnery[942]. In the year 1433

Catherine de la Pole, abbess of Barking, petitioned Henry V. for a sum of

money due to her for the maintenance of Edward and Jasper Tudor, sons of

Catherine, the queen dowager, by Owen Tudor. It seems that these boys were

receiving their education at this abbey[943]. But the popularity of the

convent even as an educational establishment began to decrease at the

close of the 14th century. Judging from the Paston Letters it was no

longer customary in Norfolk to send girls to board with the nuns; they

were sent to stay away from home with some other country family.

Other offices held by members of the convent are as follows:

_thesaurissa_,--the nun bursar who was responsible for the revenues coming

through the Church; the _precentrix_ and _succentrix_,--the leaders and

teachers of the choir, who are sometimes mentioned together (Campsey); the

_cameraria_ or chambress,--who saw to the wardrobe; the _infirmaria_ or

keeper of the infirmary,--who took charge of the sick nuns; the

_refectuaria_,--who had the care of the refectory or dining hall; the

_elemosinaria_,--who distributed alms; the _magistra noviciarum_,--who

taught the novices. The _cantarista_ occurs in connection with Sheppey; no

doubt she is identical with the _precentrix_ of other places. The further

designations of _tutrix_, or teacher, occurs in connection with

Shaftesbury, and _eruditrix_, instructress, in connection with Thetford; I

have not come across these terms elsewhere.

All these appointments were made by the superior of the house and declared

in the presence of the convent, and all except those of chaplain and

kitchener seem to have been permanent. The chaplain was probably changed

because it was a privilege to go about with the abbess, and the kitchener

because of the hard work her duties involved. On the death of the abbess

often the prioress, sometimes the cellaress, was appointed to succeed her,

but not necessarily so.

Having so far treated of the duties of the convent inmates, we will

examine the form of admission for novices and the daily routine of the

nun.

According to the rhymed rule of St Benedict (l. 2155) the girl who was old

enough to be admitted as nun into a religious community was granted entry

as a novice and after two months had ‘the law’ read to her, and then the

question was put if she wished to stay or to go. If she stayed, it was for

six months; after which, if still desirous of being received, she

proffered her petition to the abbess. If after twelve months she still

persisted in her resolution, she was received as a member of the convent

and pronounced these words before the altar: ‘Suscipe me, domine, secundum

eloquium tuum, et vivam. Et non confundas me in expectatione mea.’ The

formal profession or consecration was undertaken by the bishop, who

visited the nunnery periodically, but as these visits were often years

apart, it is probable that the declaration made before the superior of a

house and the priest constituted a novice a member of a convent, and for

all practical purposes made her a nun. Fosbroke is of opinion that the

girl who entered at the age of twelve made profession after she had passed

a year in the community: he adds that she was consecrated by the bishop

when she had reached the age of twenty-five and not before[944]. But it

is impossible to draw a line between profession and consecration, as the

‘non-professed’ nun was invariably the nun who had not been installed by

the bishop. In 1521 at the visitation of Rusper the settlement consisted

of the prioress, one professed nun and two nuns entered on the list as not

professed, of whom one declared that she had lived there awaiting

profession for twelve years, the other for three[945]. Women who had been

professed at one house were sometimes inmates of another; and I have not

found any remark which leads to the inference that this was thought

objectionable. A nun residing at Rusper was afterwards prioress of

Easebourne. The record of a visitation at Davington in Kent (1511) shows

that the convent contained four inmates, of whom two were professed nuns.

The one, professed at Cambridge, had been there for twenty years; the

other, professed at Malling, had been there for ten. The other two inmates

entered on the list as not professed were girls of ten and fifteen[946].

The consecration of nuns was a very ancient and solemn rite. Several forms

of the office as celebrated in England are in existence[947]. One comes

from the monastery of St Mary’s, Winchester, and is contained in a

manuscript written probably soon after 1500; the directions are in

English, but the words in which the bishop addressed the maidens and their

answers are in Latin. Another manuscript written about 1480 contains the

office as used in the diocese of Lincoln, with prayers in English and

rubrics in Latin; it contains also various directions and addresses

omitted in the other manuscript. A third is throughout in English.

These forms of consecration show that after the celebration of the office

of high mass in church the prospective nuns entered, each bearing a habit,

a veil, a ring and a scroll. The form of interrogation they were put

through and the prayers they recited during the installation are given.

The declaration was made by the nuns in Latin and runs as follows: ‘I,

sister ..., promise steadfastness (stabilitatem), continuance in virtue

(conversionem morum meorum), and obedience before God and all His saints.’

We also have the declaration of four nuns who were installed by the

bishop of Ely at Chatteris, which is couched in similar terms[948]. The

nun in this case made her promise ‘in accordance with the rule of St

Benedict in this place, Chatteris, built in honour of St Mary, in the

presence of the reverend father in Christ, William, bishop of Ely,’ adding

‘I subscribe this with my own hand,’ whereupon she made the sign of the

cross on the scroll which she carried in her hand and from which she had

read her declaration. The form of declaration made at Rusper in Sussex in

the year 1484 is similar, but the nun further promises ‘to live without

property (sine proprio)’ of her own[949].

For several days after her consecration the nun lived in retirement,

strictly observing the rule of silence. She then resumed her ordinary

duties in church, cloister, refectory and dormitory. She usually kept

within the convent close, but she was not altogether cut off from

intercourse with the outside world. The rhymed rule of St Benedict of the

north, transcribing the passages which refer to the monk’s going abroad if

need be, adapts them to the use of the nun (l. 2450), ‘when a sister is

going to her father, mother, or other friends, she shall take formal leave

of the convent.’ And if she is away on an errand (l. 1967), she shall not

stay away for a meal though invited to do so unless she has asked leave

before going. And again (l. 1957) if she be away during Lent and cannot

attend service in church she shall not forget to keep the hours by saying

her prayers. And again (l. 2094), when nuns go away into the country they

shall wear ‘more honest’ clothes (that is clothes more clearly showing

their profession), which they can take off on coming home for simpler

ones. From passages such as these we gather that nuns sometimes stayed

away from their convent, leave of absence having been procured; and that

besides pilgrimages and business, friendly intercourse with their

relatives might take them away from the convent for a time.

The day at the convent was divided by the canonical hours, stated times

fixed by ecclesiastical law for prayer and devotion[950]. The hours since

the 6th century were seven in number, viz. matins, prime, tierce, sext,

none, vespers or evensong, and compline.

During winter a night office was said in church at the eighth hour, that

is at two o’clock in the morning, when the _matutinae laudes_ were sung,

but the time for that was variable. ‘Then shall they rise to sing and

read, and after that she who has need may have meditations’ (Rhymed rule,

l. 1166). Between Easter and winter however the rule says ‘that the nuns

shall unto matins rise when the day begins to dawn that they their letters

well may know.’ Injunctions sent to Easebourne in 1524 direct the prioress

to hold matins at the sixth hour, that is at midnight. Matins were

followed by a period of rest, probably till five o’clock, when the nuns

rose and assembled in the choir to celebrate the office of prime. This was

followed by business transacted in the chapter house, by a meal and by

work. According to the prose versions of the Benedictine rule children

were taught between prime and tierce.

At tierce a short chapter-mass was sung followed by continued study; ‘from

terce to sext the nuns shall read lessons’ (l. 1905). At eight the nuns

assembled in the choir for the celebration of High Mass, the principal

service of the day, after which came the chief meal. This was served in

the refectory; ‘the convent when they sit at meat for to read shall not

forget’ (l. 1739); and while reading went on ‘if any of them need aught

softly with signs they shall it crave’ (l. 1754). The time of the meal was

moveable. In summer the nuns were to eat at the sext, but on Wednesdays

and Fridays they were to fast till nones, that is noon, except ‘they swink

and sweat in hay or corn with travail great’ (l. 1768), when the time

might be altered at the will of the superior. Between December and Lent

they always ate at nones. If they eat early ‘then shall they sleep and

silence keep’ (l. 1910) till nones, from which time till evensong work was

resumed.

About three o’clock, vespers, that is evensong, once more assembled the

convent inmates in church. The celebration of evensong partook of the

solemnity of the celebration of high mass. In the monks’ houses at high

mass and at vespers the youths who were supported there for the purpose

attended and joined the brethren in their choral service. In the nuns’

houses the arrangements for the girls who dwelt with the nuns were

similar, at least in some cases. After vespers came supper, and then ‘the

nuns could sit where they would and read lessons of holy writ or else the

lives of holy men’ (l. 1791), until the tolling of the bell summoned them

to the chapter-house, where they joined their superior. Compline

completed the religious exercises of the day. After this the nuns retired

to the dormitory, where silence unbroken was to be observed. Inside the

dormitory, curtains, in some houses if not in all, were hung so as to

separate bed from bed.

The celebration of the hours formed at all times the great feature of

monastic life, and in itself involved a considerable amount of labour,

especially during the later period, when the ritual of service had become

very elaborate. Indolence and ease might creep in between whiles,

deterioration might take place in the occupations of the nuns between

hours, but the observance of the hours themselves constituted the nun’s

privilege and her _raison d’être_, and was at all times zealously upheld.

§ 3. The Foundation and Internal Arrangements of Sion[951].

Before leaving the subject of women’s convent life in England in the later

Middle Ages, it will be interesting to devote some attention to the

foundation and interior arrangements of Sion, a convent founded under

peculiar circumstances at a time when it was no longer usual to found or

endow religious settlements. The information relating to Sion has been

characterised as the most valuable record we possess of monastic life in

the 15th century. It refers to one short period only and bears out what

has already been put forward with regard to other nunneries. The interests

of the women who joined this convent centred round devotional practices

and a highly elaborated convent routine.

The settlement of Sion belonged to the order of St Bridget of Sweden, and

was the only house of its kind in England. It was situated in beautiful

surroundings near Isleworth on the Thames, and was so richly endowed that

at the time of the dissolution its income far exceeded that of any other

nunnery, not excepting the time-honoured settlements of Shaftesbury and

Barking. It was the only English community of women which escaped being

scattered at the time of the Reformation. Its convent of nuns removed to

Holland, but returned to the old house for a time after the accession of

Queen Mary. At the close of her reign the nuns again went abroad and after

various vicissitudes settled at Lisbon, where the convent continued to be

recruited from English homes till the beginning of this century. Then the

nine sisters of which the convent consisted came to England, and settled

at Chudleigh, near Newton-Abbot, in Devonshire.

A few words in passing must be devoted to the nun and saint Bridget[952]

of Sweden, founder of the order which took her name--a woman of

acquirements and influence. She was born of a kingly race in 1304, and

from the house of a powerful father passed to that of a powerful husband;

but the responsibilities of a large household and the care of a family of

seven children did not draw her attention from social and political

affairs. She was strongly imbued with the need of reform in religion, and

believed in the possibility of effecting a change by encouraging

monasticism. A large part of her property and much of her time were

devoted to enlarging the religious settlement of Wadstena. She then went

on a pilgrimage to Santiago in Spain, after which husband and wife

separated, each to embrace convent life. Bridget, or Birgitta as her

people called her, dwelt at Wadstena, which she reformed according to

rules which she believed she had received direct from heaven. She also

wrote some ‘Revelations,’ which in their strong invective recall the

Revelations of St Hildegard of Bingen with this difference, that St

Bridget with open directness spoke of the dangers which she thought were

gathering around Sweden. The tone of these writings brought her into

difficulties. She escaped from them by removing to Rome in 1350, where she

lived for over twenty years. Here she was looked upon as the

representative of the Church party which strongly censured the Pope for

continuing to dwell at Avignon. This party looked upon Bridget as the

chosen mouthpiece of God. Her power of prophecy was generally recognised

after her threatening visions about the state of things in Sweden had

proved true. Settlements on the plan of that of Wadstena rapidly

multiplied during her lifetime in Sweden and in North Germany. It was

partly owing to her influence that the first attempt was made to translate

the Bible into Swedish, and she is looked upon by the Swedes as one of

that faithful band who worked for their national regeneration. She died in

1372 and was officially canonised a saint in 1391[953].

A great feature of the order of St Bridget was that its settlements

consisted of a double community of men and women who combined for purposes

of divine service, but were otherwise separate, each community having its

own conventual buildings separately enclosed. The convent of nuns,

according to Bridget’s stipulation, numbered sixty women including the

abbess, and in accordance with a fanciful notion, such as one comes across

in the Middle Ages, these women had associated with them thirteen priests,

who represented the apostles, four deacons who represented the great

doctors of the Church, and eight lay brothers; the lady abbess was at the

head of this double community. The order in its development abroad

endeavoured to influence all classes. It encouraged charity, promoted

education and collected books. But in England its tone fell in with that

of other nunneries in the 15th century; the interests of Sion were

entirely devotional and its large library seems to have contained

religious works only.

I am not aware of any mention of Bridget in contemporary English

literature previous to the introduction of her order into this country,

which took place at the beginning of the 15th century. In the year 1406

Philippa, daughter of Henry IV, was sent to Lund in Sweden to be married

to King Eric XIII (1382-1445), under whose rule the crowns of Sweden,

Denmark and Norway were united. The princess travelled under the charge of

Henry, third Baron Fitzhugh, who held an important position at the court

of Henry IV; he was made Constable of England at the coronation of Henry

V, and seems to have been on terms of intimacy with both these monarchs.

By some means Fitzhugh’s attention was drawn to the monastery of Wadstena,

the chronicle of which records his visit to it. He volunteered to found a

branch of the order of St Bridget in England, and promised the gift of a

manor, Hinton near Cambridge, on condition that some of the order took

possession of it within three years.

In consequence of Fitzhugh’s visit and offer a priest and two deacons

professing the order of St Bridget were elected at Wadstena in 1408, and

sent to England. Blunt considers it probable[954] that it was by the

advice of Fitzhugh that Henry V about this time devoted manors at Sheen

and Isleworth to religious purposes. Carthusian monks were settled at

Sheen, nuns of St Bridget were settled at Isleworth,--and the two

settlements were called respectively Bethlehem and Sion. In February of

1415 Henry V in the presence of the bishop of London laid the foundation

stone of a building destined for the nuns near Twickenham, and in March

the royal charter was drawn up and signed. By this the members of the new

settlement were bound ‘to celebrate Divine Service for ever for our

healthful estate while we live and for our souls when we shall have

departed this life, and for the souls of our most dear lord and father

(Henry IV) late king of England, and Mary his late wife, etc.’ Before the

close of the year four consecrated Swedish sisters, three novices and two

brothers arrived in England from Wadstena. They were sent by the king and

queen of Sweden and were sped on their way by the archbishop of Lund and

other dignitaries.

The settlement at Sion had been granted an income of a thousand marks, to

be drawn from the royal exchequer until the permanent endowments made to

it should amount to that sum. In 1418 Pope Martin V received the house

under his special protection; the first profession or monastic engagement

took place two years later. Twenty-four nuns, five priests, two deacons

and four lay brothers pronounced their vows before archbishop Chicheley of

Canterbury (1420). And before the close of Henry’s reign (1422) the house

was endowed with manors and spiritualities, scattered over the land from

Kent to the Lake district, which were chiefly appropriated from the

possessions of alien priories.

The appropriation of alien priories forms an interesting episode in the

history of English monasticism, for it constitutes a prelude to the

dissolution of monasteries generally. While men were becoming critical of

religious institutions owing to the spread of Lollard doctrines, the

Lancastrian kings appropriated the lands and the revenues of alien

priories and made use of them to fortify the Church and monasticism, thus

counteracting influences which in the first instance had made the

appropriation of these houses possible.

The number of alien priories in England is differently quoted as a hundred

and a hundred and forty[955]. Most of them had been founded soon after the

Conquest, when the gift of a manor on English soil to a foreign house had

brought over from France a few monks and nuns, who after defraying the

expenses of their houses remitted any surplus revenue or else forwarded a

sum of money in lieu of it to the parent house. When the relations between

France and England became strained it appeared advisable to sever the

connection between the foreign house and its English colonies. Edward I,

when he determined on war with France, appropriated the revenues of alien

priories for a time, and his successors frequently did the same; the

dangers to which these cells were exposed causing some foreign houses to

sever the connection by selling their English property.

The alien cells occupied by nuns were very few. Amesbury, which had been

constituted a cell to Fontevraud, regained its independent standing during

the wars with France[956]; Westwood[957], another cell of Fontevraud, and

Levenestre or Liminster in Surrey, a cell of Almanache in Normandy, were

dispersed, and the abbess of Almanache treated for the sale of the

property[958].

After many attempts to interfere with foreign cells Henry V resolved on

their final sequestration (1414), and it was part of the property thus

appropriated which was bestowed on the houses called Bethlehem and Sion.

The chief information we have on the conventual life of the women

assembled at Sion is contained in a set of ‘additional rules’ written in

English ‘for the sisters of the order of St Saviour and St Bridget’[959].

The same rules exist in a manuscript of contemporaneous date adapted to

the use of the brothers, whose duties, save in a few particulars, were

similar. They acted as priests and confessors to the double community. The

chapel had a double chancel, each with its separate stalls; it was divided

by a ‘crate’ or grille which did not prevent the brothers and sisters from

being visible to each other during divine service. The gate of this grille

was kept locked, and was only opened for the entrance and departure of the

clergy when they said mass at the altar of the sisters’ chapel. The lay

brothers of the settlement acted as labourers, and had no part in the

government of the house.

The additional rules for the sisters are grouped together in fifty-nine

chapters, and contain most elaborate directions not only as to the

occupation, behaviour and special duties of the various inmates of the

convent, but for exigencies of every kind. After directions about the

holding of the Chapter, lists of defaults are worked out, grouped under

the headings of light, grievous, more grievous and most grievous (c. 1-7).

‘A careful consideration of this code of “defaultes” and their penalties,’

says Blunt[960], ‘leads to the conclusion that it was intended as an

exhaustive list of _possible_ crimes, and that it offers no ground for

believing that the Sisters of Sion were ever guilty of them or ever

incurred the severer punishments enjoined in connection with them.’ Among

‘light defaults’ we note such as neglect in religious observance and in

washing; among ‘grievous defaults,’ despising the common doctrine as

taught by the holy fathers, and going unconfessed for fourteen days. ‘More

grievous defaults’ are such as sowing discord, theft, and using sorcery or

witchcraft; ‘most grievous defaults’ are manslaughter, fleshly sin, and

blasphemy. We gather from the directions that one mode of severe

punishment was imprisonment, whereas ‘discipline’ was administered

regularly by the sisters to each other. The power of the abbess over the

members of the convent was absolute; she is spoken of in these rules

sometimes as sovereign, sometimes as majesty. It was she who decreed

punishment and penance, and when the bishop enjoined correction in

consequence of an enquiry, she decided upon and administered it.

Twenty-eight questions, which the bishop on the occasion of his visitation

was allowed to put to the abbess and the convent, are given (c. 10). They

refer to devotional duties, to the observance of fasts, etc. One question

(nr 10) enquires of the sisters how they are occupied when they are not at

divine service or at conventual observances; another (nr 18) if there be

an inventory or register of the books of the library, and how they and

other books of study are kept; again another (nr 26) enquires as to the

state of the infirmary.

A caution against slander suggests a curious idea of equity. If any sister

bring an accusation against another before the bishop, she shall not be

heard ‘unless bound to the pain if she fail in proof, that she whom she

accuses shall have, if she be found guilty.’

Among the men who necessarily had access to the women’s conventual

buildings, physicians, workmen and labourers are enumerated.

The election of a new abbess (c. 12) was effected by the sisters alone

within three days of the occurrence of a vacancy. It was not managed in

quite the same way as elsewhere. The prioress proposed a name, and if the

sisters voted unanimously in favour of it, the election was called ‘by the

way of the Holy Ghost.’ But if they did not agree, they named a candidate

and the ballot was repeated till a sufficient majority was obtained. The

election was not valid unless confirmed by the bishop. When the abbess

pronounced the words of her ‘obedience’ she was supported by a learned man

of law or notary, besides the confessor of the house and two brothers. The

confessor was appointed at the discretion of the abbess herself, the

‘sadder’ or elderly sisters and the brothers; but the other appointments

were made by the abbess alone (c. 13). She appointed the sisters to office

and could remove them. As elsewhere, she was obliged to do so in the

chapter-house in the presence of the convent.

The rules of keeping silence, the year of proof, and the instruction and

profession of novices, are fully discussed (c. 15). The account of how the

sisters were professed is supplemented by Aungier[961]. He gives an

additional description of the ceremony in church, probably of somewhat

later date, and of the interrogatory through which the bishop put the

prospective nun. The first question which he put was to this effect: ‘Art

thou free and unfettered by any bond of the Church, or of wedlock; of vow,

or of excommunication?’ to which she made answer, ‘I am truly free.’ The

bishop then asked: ‘Does not shame, or perchance grief of worldly

adversity, urge thee to a religious profession, or perhaps the multitude

of thy debts compel thee?’ To which she answered: ‘Neither grief nor shame

incites me to this, but a fervent love of Christ; and I have already paid

all my debts according to my power,’ etc. I have not met with similar

questions in any other place.

In the additional rules directions are also given about singing and

keeping the hours and the festivals (c. 18-44). The day at Sion was

divided by the seven ‘hours’ in the usual way. At the hours in chapel the

‘sadder’ or elder sisters sang together with the younger ones or

‘song-sisters.’ The ‘observance of the altar’ at both masses belonged to

the brothers; it was so arranged that the brothers’ service came first and

the sisters’ began when that of the brothers ended. In addition to the

usual hours and masses two ceremonies were daily observed at Sion. One was

the singing of the psalm _De Profundis_ at an open grave to which the

whole convent wended its way after tierce. The other consisted of a prayer

addressed to Mary in chapel before evensong, from which none of the

sisters was to absent herself except for an important reason.

A number of festivals were celebrated at Sion with special services and

processions (c. 29). Among them were the feast of the Circumcision, the

translation of St Bridget and the day of St John the Baptist ‘when their

feasts fall on Sunday and not else’; also Palm Sunday, St Mark’s day,

Rogation Sunday, St Peter and St Paul, St Anne’s, Michaelmas, all the

feasts of Our Lady and all the principal or high double feasts of the

year. On these occasions the sisters walked two and two in procession, and

the sister who was sexton bore the ‘image of our lady’ after the cross,

and two torches were carried on either side a little before the image. The

additional rules contain directions to the sisters on the arrangement of

divine service on these occasions, and further directions in the rule for

the brothers minutely describe the elaborate ritual which took place.

The additional rules also contain a full description of the duties of each

appointment in the convent (c. 45). The choir in church was led by a

_chauntres_ and _subchauntres_ who should be ‘cunning and perfect in

reading and singing.’ It was the duty of the _ebdomary_, or weekly

appointed nun (c. 46), to be one of the first in choir; she was ‘to

abstayn and withdrawe herself from alle thynges that wyke that myght lette

her to performe her office.’ When the abbess did not execute the service

the ebdomary began the _Invitatory_; and she always gave the third

blessing after the abbess had read the third lesson. She also fulfilled

the office of the abbess at the principal feasts, except in such things as

belonged exclusively to the abbess.

We hear also of the duties of the sexton, _sexteyne_ (c. 48), who kept the

church ornaments and the altar ‘whole and sound, fair, clean and honest,’

and who saw to the washing of altar-cloths, _awbes_ or surplices. She was

not allowed to touch or wash the hallowed _corporas_ or cloths with bare

hands, but was obliged to wear linen gloves, and in starching the cloths

she was directed to use starch made of herbs only. The sexton had in her

keeping wax, lamps, oil and all other things belonging to the church; she

had to provide for the church _syngynge_ or communion _brede_, _sudarys_,

wax-candles, tallow-candles, wax rolls, tapers, torches, mats, _uattes_,

and _roundlettes_; and she provided for the _penners_, pens, ink,

inkhorns, tables, and all else that the abbess asked of her. Also she

opened and shut the doors and windows of the sisters’ choir and common

places, lighted and extinguished tapers and candles, and snuffed them ‘in

such wise and in such time that the sisters be not grieved with the

savour.’

It was the duty of the sexton to ring the bells in the women’s part of the

house; the ringing of a bell regulated throughout the life of those

assembled at Sion. It roused the brothers and sisters from sleep, summoned

them to church, called them to meals, and ever and anon gave notice for a

devotional pause in whatever occupation was going on at the moment. When

one of the community passed away from life the large or curfew bell was

tolled continuously.

Another appointment in the women’s convent was that of the _legister_ or

reader at meals (c. 50), who was directed to read out distinctly and

openly, that all might understand, whatever the abbess or chauntress had

assigned. On one day of the week she read out the rule. Absolute silence

reigned during meals. If anyone had a communication to make, this was done

by means of signs, used also at other times when silence was to be

observed. A curious ‘table of signs used during the hours of silence by

the sisters and brothers in the monastery of Sion’ was drawn up by Thomas

Betsone[962], one of the brothers. Together with other tables of the kind,

it suggests the origin of the method by which the deaf and dumb were

formerly taught.

At Sion the abbess had her meals with the sisters, sitting at a high table

while they sat at side tables (c. 51-52), and the servitors or lay sisters

waited. When they had done the sisters wiped their knives and spoons on

the napkins (without washing them?); they were to guard against spotting

the cloth, and spilling the food, and were directed to put away their cups

and spoons honest and clean (without washing them?) into the ‘coffyns’

which were kept underneath the table, or in some other place ordered by

the abbess. At the end of a meal the sisters swept together the crumbs

with their napkins, and then, at a sign from the abbess, they bore the

food away to the serving-house. The youngest sister took the first dish,

and each one carried away something according to age. The language in

which the utensils are described presents some difficulties. They carried

away the drink and then ‘the garnapes that they sette on, ther pottes and

cruses, after thys, brede, hole, kytte, cantelles, ande crommes, and laste

of alle salt,’ ending evermore with the abbess or president, and inclining

to each sister as they took them up and they again to them.

The behaviour of the sisters to each other and to the abbess in the

refectory, the dormitory, the chapter-house, etc. was carefully regulated

(c. 53). The sisters when they met the abbess bowed to her, ‘for love

without reverence is but childish love.’ The desire for refinement in

bearing and behaviour is manifested throughout by these directions, and

some of them are curious. Thus the sister who washed her hands was

directed not to ‘jutte up’ the water on another, nor to spit in the

lavatory, nor to presume to go without her veil and crown upon her head,

except only in her cell, washing-house, etc. Judging from this reference

to cells, the dormitory at Sion was divided by partitions or curtains, so

that each sister practically had a room to herself.

Many details are then given concerning the duties of the prioress and

other appointments. The nuns appointed to enquire into shortcomings are

here designated as _serchers_ (c. 55). The treasurer and her fellow kept

the muniments of the monastery and its possessions in gold and silver in

the treasury, in a large chest to which there were two keys, one kept by

the treasurer and the other by her fellow (c. 56). These sisters also

provided and paid for all necessary medicines, spices and powders, etc.

Duties of no small importance devolved on the _chambres_, or mistress of

the wardrobe, who saw to the raiment of the sisters and the brothers, both

in regard to linen and to woollen clothes, shaping, sewing, making,

repairing and keeping them from ‘wormes,’ and shaking them with ‘the help

of other sisters.’ I transcribe in the original spelling the things she is

told to provide: ‘_canuas for bedyng_, _fryses_, _blankettes_, _shetes_,

_bolsters_, _pelowes_, _couerlites_, _cuschens_, _basens_, _stamens_,

_rewle cotes_, _cowles_, _mantelles_, _wymples_, _veyles_, _crownes_,

_pynnes_, _cappes_, _nyght kerchyfes_, _pylches_, _mantel furres_,

_cuffes_, _gloues_, _hoses_, _shoes_, _botes_, _soles_, _sokkes_,

_mugdors_ (sic), _gyrdelles_, _purses_, _knyues_, _laces_, _poyntes_,

_nedelles_, _threde_,--_waschyng bolles and sope_,--(written in the

margin) and for all other necessaries, as directed by the abbess, which

shall not be over curious but plain and homely, without wearing of any

strange colours of silk, gold or silver, having all things of honesty and

profit and nothing of vanity after the rule, their knives unpointed and

purses being double of linen cloth, and not silk.’

In illustration of the office of the chambress, Blunt has published a

document preserved in the Record Office, which contains the account of

Dame Bridget Belgrave, chambress at Sion from Michaelmas 1536 to

Michaelmas 1537, the year preceding the dissolution[963]. This shows that

the chambress provided the material for the dress of the sisters and

other items. She buys _russettes_, white cloth, _kerseys_, fryce, Holland

cloth and other linen cloth mostly by the piece, which varies in the

number of its yards; she provides soap, calf-skins, thread, needles and

thimbles; she purchases new spectacles and has old ones mended. Among many

other items of interest we find fox-skins, paper, and pins of divers

sorts; she sets down a sum for burying poor folks, and ‘expences at

London,’ from which we gather that she had been there; and pays ‘rewards’

and ‘wages’ to the _grome_, the _skynner_, and the _shumakers_.

The duties of the cellaress stand next in the additional rules (c. 56),

and they recall the complex duties belonging to the same post at Barking.

Blunt has also illustrated these duties by publishing the accounts,

rendered by Dame Agnes Merrett, for the last year preceding the

dissolution[964]. This cellaress also charged herself with various sums

received for hides, calf-skins and wool-felles or sheep-skins. She

received payment for boarding My Lady Kyngeston and her servants, and

sister Elizabeth Nelson. She received rent from various tenants and

managed the home farm at Isleworth. We hear of her buying horses, cattle,

hogs and peacocks for its storing. Its dairy was managed by paid servants.

This cellaress, like her fellow at Barking, purchased provisions and fish

for the use of the convent, but her entries are more numerous and infer a

higher standard of living, perhaps due to the fact that these accounts are

more than a hundred years later than the ‘charge of the cellaress at

Barking.’ The cellaress at Sion also bought salt salmon, herrings by the

barrel, and red herrings by the ‘caade’; also _stubbe_ eels. She further

bought spices, fruits, sugar, nutmegs, almonds, currants, ginger,

isinglass, pepper, cinnamon, cloves, mace, _figge doodes_ (sic),

_topnettes_ (sic), great raisins, prunes, saffron and rice. Her ‘foreign

payments’ include seed for the garden, boat-hire, and expenses at London,

by which we see that she too, like the chambress of the house, had been

there. Among her other expenses are _rewards_ to the ‘clerke of the

kechyn,’ the ‘baily of the husbandry,’ the ‘keper of the covent (convent)

garden,’ and the ‘cookes.’ Members of the convent were deputed by the

abbess to look after the sick (c. 57), and the writer insists upon the

need of gentleness and patience in dealing with them.

‘Often change their beds and clothes,’ he says, ‘give them medicines, lay

to them plaisters and minister to them meat and drink, fire and water,

and all other necessaries night and day, as need requires after the

counsel of the physicians, and precept of the sovereign; do not be

squeamish in washing and wiping them by avoiding them, be not angry nor

hasty, nor impatient though one have the vomit, another the flux, another

the frenzy, and now sings, now cries, now laughs, now weeps, now chides,

now is frightened, now is wroth, now well apayde, for there be some

sickness vexing the sick so greatly and provoking them to ire that the

matter drawn up to the brain alienates the mind. And therefore those in

attendance should have much patience with them, that thereby they may

secure an everlasting crown.’

Aungier has also reprinted lists of the capabilities of indulgence granted

to Sion, and of the pardons secured by those who offered prayers in the

chapel there[965]. This shows one of the means by which money was secured

to religious houses in the 15th century. Indulgences were granted at Sion

on almost every festival in the year. By ‘devoutly giving somewhat to the

reparation of the said monastery’ and offering prayers on Midlent Sunday,

the visitor at Sion might secure pardon extending from a hundred days to

‘clean remission of all sin except in the points which are reserved to the

Pope.’ To give alms on the feast of St Bridget, the patron saint of the

house, secured to him who sought help ‘pardon and clean remission in all

cases reserved and unreserved,’ according to the wording of the document.

This power, as the manuscript informs us, had been granted ‘by diverse

holy fathers, popes at Rome, archbishops, bishops, cardinals and legates.’

Aungier supplements it by printing a document which came from Norfolk on

the capabilities of pardon possessed by different religious houses[966].

There are entries in this referring to the ‘pardoun of beyds’ of the

Charterhouse of Mount Grace and of the Charterhouse at Sheen, and to the

pardon of beads at Sion and at the ‘Crossed Friars’ beside London Tower.

A number of devotional books were written for the nuns at Sion; some in

Latin, some in English. A few of the service books of the house have been

preserved. Among them is the Martyrology which was in daily use among the

brothers and which contains historical memoranda, accounts of the saints,

the records of the deaths of the sisters, brothers and benefactors of the

house between 1422 and 1639, and extracts from religious writers. This

martyrology accompanied the women’s convent on their wanderings, and since

their return it has been acquired by the British Museum[967]. A

translation of it into English was made by Richard Whytford († 1542), a

brother of Sion, ‘for the edificacyon of certayn religyous persones

unlerned that dayly dyd rede the same martiloge in Latyn not

understandynge what they redde[968].’ Whytford wrote other religious

books, among them the ‘Pype or Tonne of Perfection’; the ‘Fruyte of

redempcyon,’ which is now held to be by ‘Simon, the anker of London,’ has

been attributed to him.

Among other books written for the nuns is a curious discourse in English

by Thomas Fishbourne, father confessor in 1420, to which is added a

portion of the gospel of St Peter ad Vincula[969]. It contains a

discussion on the nature of pardons and indulgences, particularly of those

procured at Rome. Symon Wynter, another brother of the house (1428), wrote

a treatise for them in praise of the Virgin (Regina Coeli)[970]; and

Thomas Prestius wrote instructions for the novices[971]. The house owned a

large library, to the celebrity of which Sir Richard Sutton added by a

splendid work printed at his expense by Wynkyn de Worde in 1519 and called

in honour of the monastery ‘The Orchard of Syon[972]’.

The most important work in English however compiled for the nuns was a

devotional treatise on divine service with a translation into English of

the Offices, called the ‘Mirror of Our Lady,’ first printed in 1530, the

authorship of which is attributed by its latest editor, Blunt, to Thomas

Gascoigne (1403-1458)[973]. Gascoigne was an eminent divine, at one time

Chancellor of the University of Oxford; he caused the life of St Bridget

to be translated into English and bequeathed most of his books by will to

the sisters at Sion. The Offices in this book are amplified, and Blunt was

much struck by the similarity of many passages to the Book of Common

Prayer. The purpose of the writer is expressed in the following

words[974]:

‘As many of you, though you can sing and read, yet you cannot see what

the meaning thereof is.... I have drawn your legend and all your service

into English, that you see by the understanding thereof, how worthy and

holy praising of our glorious Lady is contained therein, and the more

devoutly and knowingly sing it and read it, and say it to her worship.’

The ‘Mirror of Our Lady’ is very instructive with regard to the just

estimation of the position and feelings of religious women during the

later Middle Ages. There is much in it that is eloquent, refined, and

beautiful, but its insistence on detail is sometimes wearisome. The style

of the writer is fitly illustrated by the following passages, which are

taken from the introductory treatise on the reading of religious

books[975]. The wording of the original is retained as closely as

possible, but the spelling is modernized.

‘Devout reading of holy books is called one of the parts of contemplation,

for it causes much grace and comfort to the soul if it be well and

discreetly used. And much reading is often lost for lack of diligence,

that it is not intended as it ought to be. Therefore if you will profit in

reading you must keep these five things. First you ought to take heed what

you read, that it be such thing as is speedwell for you to read and

convenient to the degree you stand in. For you ought to read no worldly

matters nor worldly books, namely such as are without reason of ghostly

edification or belong not to the need of the house; you ought also to read

no books that speak of vanities and trifles, and much less no books of

evil or occasion to evil. For since your holy rule forbids you all vain

and idle words in all times and places, by the same it forbids you reading

of all vain and idle things, for reading is a manner of speaking. The

second, when you begin to read or to hear such books of ghostly fruit as

accord for you to read or to hear, that then you dispose yourselves

thereto with meek reverence and devotion.... The third that you labour to

understand the same thing that you read. For Cato taught his son to read

so his precepts that he understand them. For it is, he says, great

negligence to read and not to understand. And therefore when you read by

yourself alone you ought not to be hasty to read much at once but you

ought to abide thereupon, and sometimes read a thing again twice or thrice

or oftener till you understand it clearly. For St Austin said that no man

should ween to understand a thing sufficiently in any wise by once

reading. And if you cannot understand what you read, ask of others that

can teach you. And they that can ought not to be loth to teach others....

The fourth thing that is to be kept in reading is that you dress so your

intent that your reading and study be not only for to be cunning or for to

be able to speak it forth to others, but principally to inform yourself

and to set it forth in your own living.... The fifth thing is discretion.

So that according to the matter you arrange your reading. For you must

understand that different books speak in different wise. For some books

are made to inform the understanding and to tell how spiritual persons

ought to be governed in all their living that they may know how they shall

live and what they shall do, how they shall labour in cleansing their

conscience and in getting virtues, how they shall withstand temptation and

suffer tribulations, and how they shall pray and occupy themselves with

ghostly exercise, with many such other full holy doctrines.... Other books

there be that are made to quicken and to stir up the affections of the

soul, as some that tell of the sorrows and dreads of death and of doom and

of pains, to stir up the affection of dread and of sorrow for sin. Some

tell of the great benefits of our Lord God, how He made us and bought us

and what love and mercy He shewed continually to us to stir up our

affections of love and of hope in Him. Some tell of the joys of heaven, to

stir up the affections of joy to desire thitherward. And some tell of the

foulness and wretchedness of sin, to stir up the affections of hate and

loathing thereagainst.’