THE MEDIÆVAL HOSPITALS OF ENGLAND,
BY ROTHA MARY CLAY;
A PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK.
THE ANTIQUARY’S BOOKS
GENERAL EDITOR: J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A.
THE MEDIÆVAL HOSPITALS OF ENGLAND
[Illustration: _THE SOUTH-EAST VIEW OF THE HOSPITAL OR
MAISON-DIEU AT DOVER._
ST. MARY’S HOSPITAL, DOVER]
THE
MEDIÆVAL HOSPITALS
OF ENGLAND
BY
ROTHA MARY CLAY
WITH A PREFACE BY
THE LORD BISHOP OF BRISTOL
WITH 78 ILLUSTRATIONS
METHUEN & CO.
36 ESSEX STREET W.C.
LONDON
_First Published in 1909_
DEDICATED TO
FRANCES ARNOLD-FORSTER
WITH GRATEFUL AFFECTION
PREFACE
When the able author of this book asked me to write a Preface to a work
on Hospitals, I replied that I must first see the sheets in proof.
This was not due to any doubt of the ability of the writer, it was
due to some doubt as to the adequacy of the material at her disposal.
This doubt has been much more than removed. The mass of the material
collected is remarkable. Still more remarkable is the evidence of the
very large part played by Hospitals—in the widest senses of the word—in
the social life of the people of this land in the earlier Middle Ages.
For the fuller understanding of the social life of our ancestors, this
book contributes information of the most luminous character. It will
serve also as an example and pattern for young and earnest students
of real history, the history of ordinary human beings rather than of
generals and of kings. And it must be added that, although the division
into numerous headings leads to frequent repetitions of the names and
characters of institutions of the nature of Hospitals, it has the
great advantage of reducing to order a mass of material which might
under less careful treatment have had a chaotic appearance. As a book
of reference for readers and writers, this treatise on the Mediæval
Hospitals of England ought to hold a distinguished place.
G. F. BRISTOL
_July, 1909._
CONTENTS
Preface by the Lord Bishop of Bristol . . . vii
Introduction . . . xvii
PART I
CHAPTER I
Hospitals for Wayfarers and the Sick . . . 1
CHAPTER II
Homes for the Feeble and Destitute . . . 15
CHAPTER III
Homes for the Insane . . . 31
CHAPTER IV
The Lazar-House . . . 35
CHAPTER V
The Leper in England . . . 48
CHAPTER VI
Founders and Benefactors . . . 70
CHAPTER VII
Hospital Inmates . . . 91
CHAPTER VIII
Hospital Dwellings . . . 106
CHAPTER IX
The Constitution . . . 126
CHAPTER X
The Household and its Members . . . 143
CHAPTER XI
Care of the Soul . . . 158
CHAPTER XII
Care of the Body . . . 167
CHAPTER XIII
Hospital Funds . . . 178
CHAPTER XIV
Relations with Church and State . . . 194
CHAPTER XV
Decline of the Hospitals . . . 212
CHAPTER XVI
The Dissolution of Religious Houses and its Effect
upon Hospitals . . . 226
PART II
Hospital Patron-Saints . . . 244
APPENDIX A
Office at the Seclusion of a Leper . . . 273
APPENDIX B
Tabulated List of Foundations . . . 278
Bibliography . . . 339
General Index . . . 343
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT
* Asterisk denotes that buildings remain in much the same condition as
shown.
The seals are copied mainly from impressions in the British Museum.
1. St. John’s Hospital, Oxford . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 1
[After M. Paris, B.M. Roy. 14 C. vii. f. 221.]
2. A Pilgrim . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 6
[B.M. 17 C. xxxviii. f. 39, xiv. cent.]
3. Domus Conversorum, London . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 20
[Idem.] Home for Jews, founded 1232. Site
occupied by Rolls Chapel, Chancery Lane.
4. *Poor Priests’ Hospital, Canterbury . . . B. C. Boulter . . . 23
[From _Ancient Cities_ Series.]
5. *The Bede-House, Stamford . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 29
6. Seal of the Lazar-House, Mile End . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 47
7. The Leper and the Physician . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 59
[Trin. Coll. Camb. O.I. 20, by permission of the
Librarian.]
Represents, perhaps, the examination of a
suspected person.
8. Elias, a Leper-monk . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 64
[Notes on Painted Glass in Canterbury Cathedral;
from window in the Trinity Chapel, partly new,
partly fragments of old glass.]
9. A Leper . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 68
[Exeter Pontifical, B.M. Lands. 451 f. 127; xiv.
cent. MS., marginal sketch possibly xv. cent.]
10. “The Memorial of Matilda the Queen” . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 71
[After Matthew Paris, _Hist. Major_, Corp. Chr.
Coll. Camb., MS. xvi, xxvi, by permission of the
Librarian.]
_Memoriale Matildis reginæ scilicet hospitale
Sancti Egidii quod est Londoniæ._
11. *Tomb of Rahere in St. Bartholomew’s, Smithfield . . . J. Charles
Wall . . . 76
12. Memorial Brass of John Barstaple . . . — . . . 84
[By kind permission of Mr. J. W. Arrowsmith.]
13. *St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, Bristol . . . S. J. Loxton . . . 89
[By kind permission of the Proprietor of the
_Western Daily Press_.]
14. Seal of St. Bartholomew’s, London . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 93
15. Seal of Knightsbridge Hospital . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 103
Depicts Blessed Virgin and Child with St. Leonard.
Inscribed: _Sigillum: ospici sci: lenarde (?):
kynght brigge_.
16. Seal of St. Alexis, Exeter . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 107
17. Seal of St. John’s, Exeter . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 107
18. Seal of St. John’s, Stafford . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 108
19. Plan of St. Mary’s, Chichester . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 112
[Dollman’s Domestic Architecture.]
20. Plan of St. Nicholas’, Salisbury . . . — . . . 113
Drawn by Mr. J. Arthur Reeve, architect. By kind
permission of Canon Wordsworth.
21. Sherburn Hospital, near Durham . . . — . . . 118
[Hutchinson’s Durham, 1787.]
The gateway and chapel remain.
22. Plan of St. Mary Magdalene’s, Winchester . . . J. Charles Wall
. . . 119
[After Schnebbelie.]
23. *Chapel of Abbot Beere’s Almshouse, Glastonbury . . . J. Charles
Wall . . . 124
24. Seal of the leper-women of Westminster . . . J. Charles Wall
. . . 147
25. *Ancient Hospital Altar at Glastonbury . . . — . . . 165
[By kind permission of Mr. George Gregory, Bath,
from Rev. C. L. Marson’s _Glastonbury_.]
In the chapel of the almshouse founded or
re-founded by Abbot Beere.
26. A Leper with clapper and dish . . . — . . . 177
[After a Miniature in the Bibl. de l’Arsenal,
Paris, MS. 5060; xiii. cent.; from La Vie Privée
d’Autrefois, “L’Hygiène,” A. Franklin, 1890.]
27. Document and Seal of Holy Innocents’, Lincoln . . . J. Charles
Wall . . . 180
[B.M. Harl. ch. 44 A. 29.]
28. Alms-box, Harbledown Hospital . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 192
Erasmus dropped a coin into it on his visit to
Harbledown.
29. *Bell-turret of St. Mary Magdalene’s, Glastonbury . . . E. H. New
. . . 198
[From _Ancient Cities_ Series.]
30. Seal of St. Anthony’s, London . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 208
[_Gent. Mag._ 1784 ii.]
31. *Gateway of St. John’s, Canterbury . . . B. C. Boulter . . . 241
[From _Ancient Cities_ Series.]
32. Seal of St. Mary Magdalene’s, Bristol . . . J. Charles Wall
. . . 252
33. Seal of St. Mark’s, Bristol . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 254
34. Seal of St. Clement’s, Hoddesdon . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 256
35. Seal of St. Katherine’s, Bristol . . . J. Charles Wall . . . 260
36. A Pilgrim’s Sign . . . — . . . 265
[_Collectanea Antiqua._]
Canterbury souvenir found at York.
37. Seal of St. Bartholomew’s, Rochester . . . J. Charles Wall
. . . 271
LIST OF PLATES
*Maison Dieu, Dover . . . _Frontispiece_
[Buck’s engraving, 1735.]
S.E. view of St. Mary’s Hospital. The restored
buildings form part of the Town Hall; the chapel
on the N.E. is used as a police-court.
I. Refreshment for Wayfarers . . . 5
[“The Pilgrim.” B.M. Tib. A. vii. f. 90, xv.
cent.]
II. *Pilgrims’ Hospital, Canterbury . . . 8
[Drawn by J. Raymond, engraved by Cook.]
N. view of St. Thomas’, Eastbridge. The windows
are those of the chapel, rebuilt _circa_ 1363.
III. *St. John’s, Canterbury . . . 15
[Idem.] The chapel exists, but altered. The hall
contains charters, alms-box, account-books, etc.
IV. *Cloister of St. Giles’, Norwich . . . 24
[Photograph, London and Co. Photo Press.]
V. *Harbledown Hospital . . . 35
[Drawn by Nelson, 1766, engraved by Cook.]
Church remains, dwellings rebuilt; hall contains
ancient utensils, etc.
VI. (_a_) St. Bartholomew’s, Gloucester . . . 73
[From Lysons’ _Antiquities_.]
S.E. view. Hospital rebuilt _temp._ Henry III.
(_b_) *St. Mary’s, Chichester . . . 73
[S.H. Grimm, B.M. Add. Burrell.]
VII. *God’s House, Southampton . . . 78
[Woodward and Wilks, Hampshire.]
St. Julian’s Chapel and God’s House Gate.
VIII. *Hospital of St. Cross . . . 81
[From Guide, J. Wilkes, 1780.]
The southern wing has disappeared.
IX. The Death of Richard Whittington . . . 82
[Life of John Carpenter, by T. Brewer, p. 26;
original in Mercers’ Hall.]
X. *Hall of St. Cross, Winchester . . . 110
[Woodward.]
XI. *St. Mary Magdalene’s, Glastonbury . . . 115
(_a_) View from the West. [Drawn by E. H. New.]
(_b_) Ground-plan. [Drawn by J. Charles Wall.]
XII. St. Giles-in-the-Fields, London . . . 117
[From a map about 1566, B.M. Crace Collection.]
(_a_) Plan of the Leper Hospital. (_b_) Church of
St. Giles.
XIII. *Ford’s Hospital, Coventry . . . 121
[Photograph by Frith.]
XIV. The Savoy Hospital, London . . . 122
[G.V. 1736, Vetusta Monumenta.]
XV. *Hospital of St. Nicholas, Salisbury . . . 129
[Original drawings by J. Buckler, B.M. K. xliii.]
(_a_) S.E. view; the present chapel is shown, and
to the right a former chapel, now a kitchen.
(_b_) W. view; the weathering of the original
porch is seen.
XVI. (a) The Warden’s House, Sherburn . . . 143
[Original drawing by Grimm, B.M.]
This residence was destroyed in 1833.
(b) *Gateway, Kepier . . . 143 [Surtees’ Durham.]
This fine gateway (1333–45) has a groined ceiling
with beautiful bosses.
XVII. *The Almshouse, Ewelme . . . 151
[Photograph by Taunt.]
“The Pratie Hospitale of poore Men” with its
“very fair Welle” was visited by Leland.
XVIII. *St. Mary’s, Chichester . . . 158
[Photograph by Valentine.]
XIX. St. Bartholomew’s, Sandwich . . . 160
[Drawn by G. Maxwell, engraved in W. Boys’
_Collections_, 1787.]
(_a_) Chapel. (_b_) Gateway.
XX. The Beggars’ Dole . . . 170
[_Gentleman’s Magazine_, 1793, from stained
glass.]
Food distributed to the hungry; one cripple uses
a “stool” or support.
XXI. St. Mary Magdalene’s, Winchester . . . 179
[J. Schnebbelie, 1788, Vetusta Monumenta.]
(_a_) Master’s House and Chapel. (_b_) Chapel
from West.
A Norman doorway from this destroyed chapel was
removed to St. Peter’s Street.
XXII. *St. Bartholomew’s, Oxford . . . 191
[Drawn by Hollis, _Gent. Mag._, 1833, i.]
The chapel and buildings remain at Bartlemas
Farm, Cowley Road.
XXIII. *St. John’s, Wilton . . . 205
[Original drawings by J. Buckler, B.M.]
(_a_) S.E. view. (_b_) N. view.
The “Priory” is still picturesque and ivy-clad.
The walls are of flints, with large quoins; the
original buttresses and windows remain. The
chapel (_a_) is in use.
XXIV. *St. Leonard’s, York (ambulatory) . . . 227
XXV. *St. Leonard’s, York (chapel) . . . 232
XXVI. *The Almshouse, Abingdon . . . 235
[Photograph by Taunt]
Now called Christ’s Hospital.
XXVII. St. Mary’s, Newcastle . . . 247
[After lithograph, J. Storey, 1844; reproduced
by permission of the Society of Antiquaries,
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, from Transactions, 1892.]
XXVIII. (_a_) St. Petronilla’s, Bury St. Edmunds . . . 256
(_b_) *Lepers’ Chapel, Dunwich . . . 256
XXIX. The Hospitality of St. Julian . . . 259
[By Cristofano Allori, Palazzo Pitti, Florence,
photograph by Brogi.]
XXX. (_a_) Spital-on-the-Street . . . 264
[S.H. Grimm, B.M.]
(_b_) *St. Edmund’s, Gateshead . . . 264
[Idem.] The chapel was built _circa_ 1247, and
restored 1837; now Holy Trinity Church, High
Street.
INTRODUCTION
_“And to relief of lazars and weak age,_
_Of indigent faint souls, past corporal toil,_
_A hundred almshouses, right well supplied.”_
(Shakespeare: Henry V., i. 1.)
While we are justly proud of our institutions for the amelioration of
the lot of the infirm and destitute, we are apt to forget that they are
not the outcome of any modern philanthropic movement, but are rather
England’s inheritance for above a thousand years.
Much has been written of the regular monastic houses. These are
situated, as it were, upon the high-roads of ecclesiastical history;
but comparatively little attention has been paid to the existence and
development of the foundations known as “Hospitals.” Although it is
with some trepidation that we tread the less-frequented by-paths of
history, an attempt will be made in this volume to illustrate the place
of the hospital in pre-Reformation times, and by this means to secure a
fuller recognition of the widespread activity of the Church of England
in former days. Hospitals played an important part in the social life
of the Middle Ages, and from the study of them much may be learnt of
the habits of a distant past.
At the outset it will be well to make clear what the hospital was,
and what it was not. It was an ecclesiastical, not a medical,
institution. It was for care rather than cure: for the relief of the
body, when possible, but pre-eminently for the refreshment of the
soul. By manifold religious observances, the staff sought to elevate
and discipline character. They endeavoured, as the body decayed, to
strengthen the soul and prepare it for the future life. Faith and love
were more predominant features in hospital life than were skill and
science.
It will surprise many to learn that—apart from actual monasteries and
friaries—there existed upwards of 750 such charitable institutions
in Mediæval England.[1] To appreciate the relative magnitude of this
number, it must be remembered that the total population was smaller
than that of London at the present day. The fact proves that clergy and
laity were battling bravely with social problems. There existed a sense
of responsibility, causing real charitable effort, although mediæval
methods may appear mistaken in the light of modern scientific and
economic principles.
The study of these ancient charities calls attention to the following
points. The first is the extent of leprosy in England. There are,
indeed, conflicting opinions concerning the prevalence of the disease,
but it is certain that the figure mentioned above includes over 200
hospitals occupied at one time by lepers. Secondly, a number of the
early foundations were in the main houses of hospitality for strangers;
and this testifies to the widespread practice of pilgrimage. There were
also general hospitals in which temporary and permanent relief was
given to needy persons of all sorts and conditions. Some were very
small institutions, mere cottage-hospitals. It is often impossible to
ascertain the character of an ancient charity. As long ago as 1594,
it was reported concerning St. Edmund’s, Gateshead: “the poor . . .
are and have been indifferently of both kindes as men and women; but
whether sicke or wholl, lepers or way fairinge, so they be poore,
needie, and indigente, is note respected.” On the other hand, in the
case of large towns, hospitals were often differentiated. Situated
in the main street, perhaps, was an infirmary-almshouse for the sick
and helpless; near a frequented gate stood a hostel for passing
pilgrims and others; outside the walls there would be at least one
leper-hospital.
It is not possible to be precise in chronology, or even to give
approximate dates. In Chantry Surveys there is often a memorandum that
no foundation can be shown, this being lost in obscurity, and the house
founded “before time of memory.” Probably the earliest authentic fact
relating to charitable houses other than monasteries is that concerning
the Saxon hospital at York, for although, in the words of Canon Raine,
“its beginning is enveloped in an atmosphere of historical romance,”
the munificence of Athelstan enables us to date its origin about the
year 937.
The year 1547 serves as a useful limit to our period, and may well
for the purposes of this book denote the close of the Middle Ages in
England. Its selection in no way implies a lack of continuity in the
Church with which every hospital was intimately associated,—yet it
marks a time of transition. Charity was crippled for a time by the
confiscations of endowments designed for the relief of the destitute,
until a new generation of philanthropists arose and endeavoured to
replace them. Thomas Fuller truly says, “the reformed Religion in
England hath been the Mother of many brave Foundations.” To support
this he instances certain famous hospitals, as that at Warwick, built
by the Earl of Leicester (1571); Croydon, by Archbishop Whitgift
(1596); Guildford, by Archbishop Abbot (before 1617), and Sutton’s
Charterhouse (1611). There is, indeed, no fundamental difference
between the earlier and later almshouses of the sixteenth century. The
author of _A History of English Philanthropy_ gives two reasons for
using the period of the dissolution of monasteries as a starting-point.
“It was then,” he says, “that modern problems began to formulate
themselves with great precision; and charity was then ceasing to be
under the immediate direction and tutelage of the Church.” For the
same reasons, the year 1547 is here used to conclude the earlier
philanthropic era.
A tabulated list of hospitals will be found in Appendix B. Additions
and corrections are earnestly invited by the author, as local and
particular knowledge is required to make it accurate and exhaustive.
From this list are excluded such infirmaries as formed an integral
part of a monastic house; but in cases where some abbey maintained a
separate institution outside its gates (with distinct constitution,
separate dedication-name, and sometimes a separate seal), the
foundation is set down as a hospital. The institutions known as
Colleges have no place unless, indeed, they maintained bedemen. The
“House of Converts” does, however, rightly belong to our subject, for
it was an almshouse and industrial home. “Hospitals” of the Orders of
the Temple and St. John of Jerusalem are excluded, because they differ
in character, although the work they carried on was partly the same.
Moreover, as they formed part of great societies, famous in and beyond
Europe, they have their own historians. Houses of the Knights of St.
Lazarus must, however, consistency notwithstanding, find a place,
because any account of relief provided for lepers would be incomplete
if that comparatively small Order were passed over. “Hospital” was
a wide-embracing term, and the occasional application of the word
to religious foundations of one kind or another has not always been
accounted a reason for their inclusion.
The history of many houses is obscure, limited in some cases to a
single reference. The great scholars Bishop Tanner and Sir William
Dugdale reaped harvests, which are garnered in their Monasticons;
yet even a humble student may now glean after them by means of the
invaluable printed Calendars of the Public Record Office. The labours
of the Historical Manuscripts Commission are likewise fruitful. Wills
are useful as showing the period up to which these institutions had
popular support. Although Appendix B was mainly compiled before the
issue of the Victoria County History, certain shires have received
several additions from that great work, the forthcoming volumes
of which will doubtless supplement the present list. Episcopal
archives throw light upon hospital-life, as upon every department of
ecclesiastical history; fresh information and confirmatory evidence
about which will be forthcoming when, by means of the Canterbury
and York Society and other Record Societies, more Registers become
accessible. It is much to be desired that local Archæological Societies
should take up and develop the history of particular houses. It is
difficult to ascertain which ancient charities still continue, but an
attempt has been made to record approximately in the appended table
such endowments as now exist.
Grateful thanks are due to those who have assisted the writer in her
task. And first, to the Lord Bishop of Bristol, whose kind offer to
contribute the Preface to this volume is only the latest proof of the
ever-helpful interest he has taken in the whole work. Mention must
also be made of Mr. R. C. Fowler, of the Public Record Office, who,
after personally examining the List of Foundations, gave hints for
its improvement. The Rev. C. S. Taylor, F.S.A. and the Rev. Canon
Wordsworth have given invaluable assistance, particularly by the
translation of the Office found in Appendix A. In various ways help has
been rendered by Miss Arnold-Forster, Professor G. H. Leonard, Mr. W.
F. Rawnsley, and by friends and correspondents too numerous to mention.
Lastly, it remains for the writer to acknowledge her indebtedness to
the Rev. Dr. Cox, General Editor of the Series, without whose kindly
encouragement she would never have ventured to go beyond a private
study of the subject in hand.
* * * * *
The Spyttell hous.[2]
¶ Copland.
¶ Syr, I pray you, who hath of you relefe?
¶ Porter.
¶ Forsoth they that be at suche myschefe
That for theyr lyuyng can do no labour
And haue no frendes to do them socour
As old people seke and impotent
Poore women in chyldbed haue here easement
Weyke men sore wounded by great vyolence
And sore men eaten with pockes and pestylence
And honest folke fallen in great pouerte
By mischaunce or other infyrmyte
Way faryng men and maymed souldyours
Haue theyr relyef in this poore hous of ours
And all other which we seme good and playne
Haue here lodgyng for a nyght or twayne
Bedred folke, and suche as can not craue
In these places moost relyef they haue
And yf they hap within our place to dye
Than are they buryed well and honestly
But not euery unseke stoborne knaue
For than we shold ouer many haue.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Nearly 800 are set down in the appended list, but some are
uncertain.
[2] From _The hye way to the Spyttell hous_ (circa 1536), in which
Robert Copland speaks with the Porter of a London hospital, probably
St. Bartholomew’s.
[p001]
MEDIÆVAL HOSPITALS OF ENGLAND
PART ONE
CHAPTER I
HOSPITALS FOR WAYFARERS AND THE SICK
“_Founded for the maintenance of poor pilgrims and other infirm
persons resorting thither to remain until they are healed of their
infirmities._”
“_For the poor, for persons going to Rome, for others coming to
Canterbury and needing shelter, and for lying-in women._” (St.
Thomas’, Canterbury.)
[Illustration: 1. ST. JOHN’S HOSPITAL, OXFORD]
The earliest charitable institutions of England were houses of
hospitality. In sketching the development of these guest-houses we must
bear in mind that the hospital (derived from _hospes_, a host or guest)
was a wayside shelter for all comers.
FIRST PERIOD (_circa_ 925–1170)
Travellers were exposed to peril by the rudeness of the times, but in
those early days hospitality was regarded as a solemn obligation. To
receive any stranger was a [p002] duty: to welcome the passing pilgrim
was a sacred privilege. Although the private entertainment of guests
was widely practised, some public institutions were required. Tradition
tells of at least two “hospitals” or hospices founded in the tenth
century (925–940). Both were in Yorkshire,[3] one being in the distant
country parts, the other in the populous town. At Flixton in Holderness
was a house of refuge “to preserve travellers from being devoured by
the wolves and other voracious forest beasts.”[4] The city of York,
on the other hand, was so great a place of thoroughfare that it was
impossible to entertain all who came. Athelstan, recognizing that the
Canons of the Minster were men of holy life, active in helping the
needy who flocked to them, assisted them in their hospitality by the
foundation of St. Peter’s hospital.
Two other early houses of charity are ascribed to the Saxon bishops
Oswald and Wulstan of Worcester. In the eleventh century at least we
emerge from tradition, for it seems clear that St. Wulstan founded that
hospital near his cathedral city which afterwards bore his name. It
will be remembered that bishops were especially bound by their vows at
consecration to be given to hospitality. In pre-Norman days, the solemn
question was in substance what is asked to-day: “Wilt thou shew mercy
and kindness, for the name of the Lord, to the poor, the stranger, and
all in want?” (_pauperibus et peregrinis omnibusque indigentibus_). To
this the elected bishop [p003] replied, “I will.” This formula occurs
in the Exeter Pontifical, compiled about nine hundred years ago, and is
repeated in Osmund’s Sarum Use.
There were, of course, pilgrims among those who sojourned in early
hostels. Englishmen have always loved travel. Not only did our Saxon
forefathers journey to Rome (receiving shelter by the way in hospitals
of English foundation), but they constantly visited their national
shrines. Probably a fresh impetus was given to pilgrimage by the
coming of the Normans. Monastic life was strengthened, and this was
a guarantee of hospitality. “Guests are to be received as if they
were Christ Himself,” said the rule of St. Benedict. In the century
after the Conquest, as in those which preceded it, the chief works of
mercy were done in the monastery. There was the _hospitium_ within
the abbey-gate, as at St. Mary’s, York; and the “Strangers’ Hall” at
Winchester. Then followed the shelter outside the walls, as at Battle,
referred to (_circa_ 1076) as “the house of the pilgrims which is
called the hospital.” During the twelfth century more independent
foundations became common. All sorts and conditions of men were
lodged—wayfarers, invalids, and even lepers.
About the year 1148, St. Bartholomew’s, Smithfield, was the resort of
sick pilgrims, of whom “many and innumerable were schewid tokynnys of
myracles.” The patients who flocked to the famous shrine and hospital
were “langwissyng men greuyd with uariant sorys”; one sought “remedie
of his akynge hede,” another suffered from “bleriednes of yen” (eyes),
and yet another from “ryngyng of his erys.” Victims of the falling
sickness [p004] (epilepsy), paralysis, dropsy, fevers, insanity, found
relief; deaf and dumb were healed; a child born blind received sight
from “the heuenly leche.”
Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury, about 1141, invited help for “the
hospital house of Dover, which two brethren, Osbern and Godwin, are
diligently building for the reception of the poor and strangers.” This
hospital of St. Bartholomew (Buckland) was also used for lepers. The
need of further provision for travellers was felt, and a benefactor
made extensive grants on condition that a house was provided for
the reception of needy people disembarking from ships: before 1163
reference is made to the _hospitium_ for strangers. It was doubtless
frequented by voyagers returning from the Crusades; but before long
an event occurred which brought multitudes to Dover, and then the old
hospital proving insufficient, became chiefly the resort of lepers, and
a new Maison Dieu was built near the quay. (See Frontispiece.)
SECOND PERIOD (_circa_ 1170–1270)
The year 1170 marks an epoch, ushering in the great pilgrimage within
and towards England. When the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury became
the goal of pious wayfarers it was necessary to find accommodation for
them. The hospitals of Canterbury and Southwark bearing the martyr’s
name were among the earliest. Within a few years such houses (often
called _Domus Dei_) were founded in most of the southern ports and
along the Pilgrims’ Way, as at Dover, Ospringe, and Maidstone. At
Strood “the poor, weak, infirm and impotent, as well neighbouring
inhabitants as travellers from distant [p005] places,” were cared for
“until they die or depart healed.” Norfolk, like Kent, was studded with
houses of charity, especially near the highway to Walsingham. Thirteen
pilgrims were lodged at Bec, near Billingford. At Thetford there was
a hospital near the passage of the river. Among other early hostels
we may enumerate those of Newcastle, Hexham, Ripon, Stamford, Aynho,
London (St. Mary’s), Bridgwater, and Ledbury.
[Illustration: _PLATE I._ REFRESHMENT FOR WAYFARERS]
The hospital was a guest-house and infirmary in one. That on
the outskirts of Oxford was called in a charter (_circa_ 1194)
_Herebergeria Hospitalis S. Joh. Bapt._; in 1233 this was refounded
(Fig. 1) “that therein infirm people and strangers might receive
remedy of their health and necessity.” The inmates of St. Nicholas’,
Salisbury, are described as passengers (_transeuntes_) and as sick and
infirm (_egroti et infirmi_). The same two-fold work of charity was
carried on at Chichester, as shown by St. Mary’s statutes:—
“If anyone in infirm health and destitute of friends should seek
admission for a term, until he shall recover, let him be gladly
received and assigned a bed. . . . In regard to the poor people who
are received late at night, and go forth early in the morning, let
the warden take care that their feet are washed, and, as far as
possible, their necessities attended to.”
There is a MS. in the British Museum entitled _The Pilgrim_. It is an
allegorical poem in the manner of the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” and sets
forth the adventures of the traveller. The illustration (Pl. I) and
description were probably taken from experience of earthly pilgrimage.
“Charity” is seen welcoming strangers, [p006] at which work she was
always busy in mediæval England:—
“And I suppose for my beste
There to herborewe and to reste
On ther cam and preyed me
And her name was _Charite_
To pylgrymes in goodly wyse
Sche dyde moste trewely the seruyse
With chere benygne and glad uysage
She brought hem to ther herbergage.”[5]
Among shrines which the pious Englishman visited may be mentioned Bury
St. Edmunds, Westminster, Durham, Beverley, St. Albans, Waltham.[6]
THIRD PERIOD (1270–1470)
[Illustration: 2. A PILGRIM]
(a) _Pilgrimage and Vagrancy._—The greatest century of pilgrimage was
past, but vagrancy was an ever-increasing problem, and inasmuch as it
affected the social life of England, it affected hospitals, directly or
indirectly. In the Statute of Labourers, drawn up in 1350, an attempt
had been made to restrain desultory wandering, idleness, mendicancy
and indiscriminate almsgiving. This was followed by many ordinances,
local and general. By a proclamation in 1359 the municipal authorities
of London declared that such unworthy beggars “do waste divers alms,
which would otherwise be given to many poor folks, such as lepers,
blind, halt, [p007] and persons oppressed with old age and divers other
maladies.” In 1369 they issued a precept “for mendicants, vagrants and
pilgrims to leave the city.” The Statute of Westminster (1383) ordered
inquiry concerning vagabonds “wandering from place to place, running in
the country more abundantly than they were wont in times past.” The Act
of 1388 declared that those who “go in pilgrimage as beggars” when fit
for employment, should be dealt with according to the previous Statute.
It will be observed that these measures were framed from an economic
standpoint, not to check pilgrimage as such.
Although pilgrimage was declining, there were still many pilgrims.
Some of these were professional palmers, and hirelings fulfilling
vows by proxy; for there are numerous bequests in the fourteenth
century to persons undertaking journeys on the testator’s behalf
to Canterbury, Walsingham, and Bury St. Edmunds, as well as to St.
James of Compostella, Rome, or the Holy Land. The special “Jubilee”
at Canterbury in 1420 was attended by 100,000 persons, and in 1434
thousands set sail for Compostella.
(b) _Provision for temporary relief._—Existing houses of hospitality
were kept up, but a growing tendency to discriminate amongst applicants
may be noticed. In many cases more beds were reserved for chronic
invalids than for casual comers. St. Thomas’ hospital, Canterbury,
carried on its old work, but the renewed statutes of Archbishop
Stratford (1342) direct “that poor pilgrims in good health shall be
entertained only for one night . . . that greater regard shall be
had for the sick than for the well pilgrims.” With some diplomacy it
describes itself, in a petition to the Pope, as designed “for persons
going [p008] to Rome (_Romipete_), for others coming to Canterbury and
needing shelter,”[7] etc.
The chief building period was over, as far as this particular kind
of temporary provision is concerned, but one or two new foundations
must be mentioned. St. John’s, Winchester, was built about 1275 “for
the relief of sick and lame soldiers, poor pilgrims, and necessitous
wayfaring men, to have diet and lodging thereto fit and convenient for
one night or longer, as their abilities to travel gave leave.” In 1393,
the Bishop of Ely offered an indulgence to persons contributing to the
sustentation of a hospital at Brentford, which consisted of a chapel,
newly constructed, “with two houses built there, furnished with beds
and other necessaries for the entertainment of poor travellers.” The
old hospital at Brackley was reconstituted for the same purpose (1425).
It was, however, suppressed sixty years later, because hospitality was
being neglected.
One special form of temporary relief came to the front about this time.
The assistance of women in childbirth was named in the Petition and
Statute of 1414 as part of the recognized aim and scope of hospital
charity. The heading to this chapter alludes to the work undertaken at
St. Thomas’, Canterbury, in 1363. The foundation deed of Holy Trinity,
Salisbury, sets forth that “lying-in women are cared for until they are
delivered, recovered and churched.” The Spital near Blyth was newly
constructed in 1446 for the lodging of strangers and distressed women.
[Illustration: _PLATE II._ HOSPITAL OF ST. THOMAS, CANTERBURY FOR
PILGRIMS]
It is recorded that the two London infirmaries of St. Mary without
Bishopsgate and St. Bartholomew [p009] undertook this work; in
both institutions the touching provision was made that if the mother
died, her child should be brought up there until the age of seven.[8]
In the year 1437 privileges were granted to the latter hospital “in
consideration of their great charges in receiving the poor, feeble
and infirm, keeping women in childbirth until their purification,
and sometimes feeding their infants until weaned.” William Gregory,
a citizen of London, describing in his commonplace book various
foundations, says of “Bartholomewe ys Spetylle”:—
“Hyt ys a place of grete comforte to pore men as for hyr loggyng, and
yn specyalle unto yong wymmen that have mysse done that ben whythe
chylde. There they ben delyueryde, and unto the tyme of puryfycacyon
they have mete and drynke of the placys coste, and fulle honestely
gydyd and kepte.”
General hospitals for the sick were thus in process of development.
St. Bartholomew’s was steadily fulfilling its founder’s vow to provide
a place for the “recreacion of poure men.” After three and a half
centuries of usefulness, a roll of 1464 records with approbation “works
done within the hospital in relief of poor pilgrims, soldiers, sailors
and others of all nations.”
FOURTH PERIOD (_circa_ 1470–1547)
(_a_) It is evident that pilgrimage was no longer an important factor
in the social life of the country. The daily resort to shrines had
practically ceased, but the special anniversaries were kept. Such
pious travellers as there were, lodged chiefly in inns. At Glastonbury
a Pilgrims’ Inn was built by Abbot John, about the year 1475, to
accommodate those visiting the holy places of [p010] St. Joseph of
Arimathæa and St. Dunstan. A later abbot, Richard Beere, writing to
Archbishop Warham to defend the genuineness of St. Dunstan’s relics,
stated that people had come from far and near to visit the new shrine,
especially upon St. Dunstan’s Day (1508).[9] Although the regular
stream of pilgrims to Canterbury was no longer seen day by day, the
great “Jubilee” celebrations were popular, the last one being kept in
1520. At that time the needs of visitors were met by special provision,
a post being set up in the main street with “letters expressing the
ordering of uitell and lodyng for pylgrymes.” Probably the bailiffs and
citizens made all arrangements for bed and board as they had done in
1420.
Vagrancy still constituted an increasingly grave problem. By “An Acte
agaynst vacabounds and beggers,” in 1495 (re-enacted 1503), previous
legislation was amended and “every vagabound heremyte or pilgryme,”
partially exempt hitherto, was henceforth compelled to fare like
wandering soldier, shipman or university clerk. In a letter from Henry
VIII to the Mayor of Grimsby it is observed that the relief of the
impotent is much diminished by the importunate begging of the sturdy
and idle, and it is required that measures be taken “that the weedes
over growe not the corne.”[10] The Statutes became increasingly stern,
and able-bodied beggars were scourged with the lash from town to town
by the Act of 1530–1. But “the greatest severities hitherto enacted
were mild in comparison with the severe provisions of the enactment”
of the first year of Edward VI (1547). If the young king’s father had
literally chastised beggars with whips, his own counsellors desired
that they should be chastised with [p011] scorpions. They might be
reduced to the condition of slaves: their owners might put a ring round
their necks or limbs, and force them to work by beating and chains,
whilst a runaway could be branded on the face with a hot iron.[11] This
brutal law was repealed two years later.
(_b_) Where towns were few and far between, the need of shelter for
strangers was especially felt. Extensive works of hospitality were
done by religious houses, particularly in the northern counties. That
fresh provision, although on a small scale, was still made for shelter,
indicates its necessity. When an almshouse was built at Northallerton
(1476), accommodation was made not only for thirteen pensioners, but
for two destitute and distressed travellers, who should stay a night
and no longer. A hostel solely for temporary shelter was founded at
Durham (1493). One Cuthbert Billingham directed the provision of eight
beds in a “massendeue or spittel,” where “all poore trauellyng people
ther herbery or logyng asking for the loue of Gode shall be herbered
and logide.” In Westmorland, a little hospital, with two beds for
passers-by, was built by John Brunskill at Brough-under-Stainmoor
(1506): it was situated on the pass into Yorkshire.
At seaports and in places of thoroughfare, shelter was still provided
for travellers. God’s House, Southampton, expended £28 annually upon
“daily hospitality to wayfarers and strangers from beyond the sea,” and
similar charity was provided at Dover. Leland describes St. Thomas’,
Canterbury, as “An Hospital within the Town on the Kinges Bridge for
poore Pylgrems and way faring men.” At Sandwich there was a “Harbinge”
attached to St. John’s almshouse. Provision was made for lodgers,
[p012] and the buildings included “the chambre of harber for strange
wemen, the gentilmen chambre and the long harbur chamber” (1489). The
town authorities ordered “that no persons do harbour beggars, who are
to resort to St. John’s Hospital” (1524).
The existing provision for temporary relief was in fact wholly
inadequate. In the metropolis, for example, there was a crying need. It
was stated by Henry VII in 1509 that:—
“there be fewe or noon such commune Hospitalls within this our Reame,
and that for lack of them, infinite nombre of pouer nedie people
miserably dailly die, no man putting hande of helpe or remedie.”
The king, recognizing the need, planned to convert the old Savoy Palace
into a magnificent institution (Pl. XIV) in which “to lodge nightly
one hundred poor folks.” If this charity corresponded with the recent
Statute, it would relieve those vagrants who alone were exempt, namely,
women in travail and persons in extreme sickness. The king contemplated
building institutions similar to the Savoy in York and Coventry, but
the design was not carried out.
The problems arising from true poverty and false mendicancy were, of
course, intimately connected with hospital life. A graphic picture
of the difficulties which beset administrators of charity about the
year 1536 is given by Robert Copland in _The hye way to the Spyttell
hous_. The author states that one wintry day, he took refuge from the
snow-storm in the porch of a hospital, probably St. Bartholomew’s. Here
he got deep into conversation with the porter of the house. While they
talked, there gathered at the gate people of very poor estate,—lame,
blind, [p013] barefoot—and Copland, who does not despise the honest
poor, only those who live in need and idleness, inquires whether
they admit all who ask for lodging. The porter at first answers,
“Forsooth, yes,” and Copland goes on to protest against indiscriminate
hospitality:—
“Me thynk that therin ye do no ryght
Nor all suche places of hospytalyte
To confort people of suche iniquyte.
But syr I pray you, of your goodnes and fauour
Tell me which ye leaue, and which ye do socour.”
The porter replies that the house is no supporter of sham beggars.
There are some who counterfeit leprosy, and others who put soap in
their mouth to make it foam, and fall down as if they had “Saynt
Cornelys euyll.” He goes on to describe those who hang about by
day and sleep at night at St. Bartholomew’s church door—drunkards,
spendthrifts, swearers and blasphemers, those who wear soldiers’
clothing, but are vagabonds, and men who pretend to have been
shipwrecked. Many of these live by open beggary, with bag, dish and
staff:—
“And euer haunteth among such ryf raf
One tyme to this spyttell, another to that.”
The porter intimates that an effort is made to discriminate among those
daily harboured, but he confesses that they are obliged to receive
many unsatisfactory men, and disreputable women so numerous that they
are weary of them; but they refuse stubborn knaves who are not ill,
for they would have over many. Indeed, the aim of the hospital is
to relieve those who cannot work and are friendless—the sick, aged,
bedridden, diseased, wayfaring men, maimed soldiers, and honest folk
fallen into poverty. (See p. xxiv.) [p014]
It is clear, however, that during the sixteenth century there was
much genuine distress besides unthrifty beggary and sham sickness.
From various economic causes there was a considerable increase of
destitution. Legislation entirely failed to solve the problem of an
ever-shifting population. The Statute of 1530–1 had recognized the
value of charitable foundations by its clause:—“provided also, that
it be lawful to all masters and governors of hospitals, to lodge and
harbour any person or persons of charity and alms.” Although hospitals
had been abused, the neglect of the sick and homeless which their
reduction involved was a far worse evil. One writer after another
breaks out into descriptions of the increased poverty and pain.
Brinklow, in _The Lamentacyon of a Christian agaynst the Cytye of
London_ (1545), bewails the condition of the poor:—
“London, beyng one of the flowers of the worlde, as touchinge
worldlye riches, hath so manye, yea innumerable of poore people
forced to go from dore to dore, and to syt openly in the stretes a
beggynge, and many . . . lye in their howses in most greuous paynes,
and dye for lacke of ayde of the riche. I thinke in my judgement,
under heaven is not so lytle prouision made for the pore as in
London, of so riche a Cytie.”[12]
Again, referring to the old order and the new, _A Supplication of the
Poore Commons_ (1546) speaks of poor impotent creatures as “now in
more penurye then euer they were.” Once they had scraps, now they have
nothing. “Then had they hospitals, and almeshouses to be lodged in,
but nowe they lye and storue in the stretes. Then was their number
great, but nowe much greater.”
[Illustration: _PLATE III._ ST. JOHN’S HOSPITAL, CANTERBURY]
FOOTNOTES:
[3] There were probably other Saxon hospitals. Leland notes the
tradition that St. Giles’, Beverley, and St. Nicholas’, Pontefract,
were founded “afore the Conquest.”
[4] Dugdale, charter temp. Henry VI.
[5] Cott. Tib. A., vii. f. 90.
[6] See also J. C. Wall, _Shrines of British Saints_ in this Series.
[7] Cal. Pap. Letters, 4, p. 36.
[8] Close Rolls 1344, 1353.
[9] Chron. and Mem. 63, p. 434.
[10] Hist. MSS. 14th R. (8) 249.
[11] C. J. Ribton-Turner, _Vagrants and Vagrancy_, 1887.
[12] Early Eng. Text Soc. Extra Series 22, p. 90.
[p015]