ISLIP AS PRIOR.
On May 24th, 1498, Abbot John Estney died. He had ruled the monastery
for twenty-four years and was nearly eighty years of age. There are
indications that he had been for some time failing in health, and the
fact that he had played no part in the action before the Privy Council
in the matter of the burial of Henry VI. suggests that most of his
powers had been by this time delegated to others. He had deserved well
of the community and his loss must have been felt keenly by his sometime
Chaplain, John Islip.
The choice of the Convent fell upon Prior Fascet as Estney’s successor.
He was only about forty-two years old, but it must have been fairly
clear from the first that the choice was made rather in view of his past
services than for any future benefit he could confer upon the
community. The plea of unfitness for the task that he made when the
election was first announced to him was more than merely formal. But a
year later and he was to forsake the independence of the abbatial manors
and occupy the chamber in the monastic infirmary specially set apart for
those for whom there seemed some hope of restoration to health. For him,
however, such restoration was not to be, and in the late summer of the
year 1500 he died. This is, however, to anticipate, and we must go back
to his appointment to the Abbacy two years earlier.
He chose Islip as his successor in the office of Prior. It is at this
point in Islip’s career that one of the small difficulties in the
reconstruction of mediæval monastic life presents itself. There were two
occasions in a monk’s career at Westminster which were deemed worthy of
especial congratulation. The one was the celebration of his first mass
after ordination to the priesthood, following on the conclusion of his
noviciate, and the other when for the first time he sat _ad
skillam_--“by the bell.” The _skilla_ was the bell which was sounded by
the Prior, or in his absence by the President, in the Refectory for
grace to be said, for the lection to begin or end, or for some other
usual signal of the mealtime. To sit by the bell, therefore, primarily
meant to preside at the monastic meal.
The phrase, however, seems to have been used more loosely of those who
occupied seats at the President’s table and thus to become capable of a
certain ambiguity. It was customary at Westminster for the heads of the
various departments to make a present in money or in kind to a monk
after his first mass and his first sitting _ad skillam_. If we are to
assume the wider meaning of the latter phrase it is impossible to
determine what were the qualifications which a monk must possess or the
period of probation through which he must pass before his promotion _ad
skillam_. Islip was not thus advanced until he became Prior, when he
must inevitably so sit; so that the qualification was evidently not that
of the holding of monastic office, however important. Moreover a survey
of the careers of a large number of monks shews that anything from four
to more than thirty years from their profession might elapse before such
promotion came. For example Kirton did not sit _ad skillam_ until he
became Abbot in 1440, thirty-two years after his first mass; while
Thomas Gedney passed to the high table in 1421, within five years of his
profession. Kirton indeed had spent some years of his monastic life at
Oxford and never occupied the position of Prior, yet it would be
expected that on one or other of his visits to Westminster he would be
found to have been sitting at the high table at a far earlier date.
If, however, the narrower meaning of the phrase, that of actually
presiding in the Refectory, may be taken as indicating the occasion upon
which _exenia_ or complimentary gifts were made, the difficulty to some
extent disappears. Actual seniority of profession would then determine
the occasion of the gifts. A relatively young monk such as John Islip
might have sat at the high table long before some accident found him as
the senior monk present in the Refectory, and the same fate might befall
one many years older than himself. Moreover it seems probable from the
fact that two tables were reserved for the senior monks in the Refectory
in addition to the table of the President that the narrower
interpretation of the phrase as used at Westminster is the more correct.
This is borne out also by the fact that the phrase itself is found not
only in its ambiguous form as _primo sedente ad skyllam_ but also as
_primo presidente ad skyllam_ which would seem to admit of no ambiguity
at all. It is to be observed that the phrase is undoubtedly used in the
narrower sense at Westminster at the close of the thirteenth century.
This digression is of some importance to a proper understanding of
Islip’s career. It might be supposed that his early advancement to
important offices had awakened some jealousy in the hearts of his
fellows and had thus delayed his admission to the high table until as
Prior he could no longer be excluded from it. That this was not the
case must be evident from the fact that two years later the brethren
themselves unanimously elected him to the highest office of all.
One further argument may be adduced. It is commonly said that the Abbot
was solely responsible for the appointment of monks to the different
offices of the monastery.[3] In the case of Westminster this general
rule requires some modification. From the time of Abbot Crispin to Abbot
Wenlock, that is to say from A.D. 1085 to 1307, it was indubitably the
custom for the prior and Convent to select two to four monks from whom
the Abbot might make his appointment to certain at least of the vacant
offices. Since in all other respects the agreements between the
Westminster Abbots and their monks continued in force in the centuries
succeeding Abbot Wenlock, there is no reason to suppose from the lack of
evidence that this particular custom changed. It may be assumed
therefore with something more than probability that Islip represented
the selection of the monastery at most stages of his advancement.
On becoming Prior Islip resigned his offices as Treasurer, Monk-Bailiff
and Warden of the Churches, all of which on occasion would take him
abroad from the cloister. He retained, however, the duties of the
Cellarership, which was a more domestic office.
As Prior indeed he had to do the work which St. Benedict had designed
for the Abbot. He must be in practice what the Abbot was in theory--the
father of the Conventual family. As will appear later the Abbot,
especially of such a monastery as Westminster, was apt to be drawn into
the vortex of public affairs to an extent which left him little leisure
for the essential duties of his position. To some extent also it must be
admitted that the Prior did not share the full life of the brethren. He
had a separate house at the end of the Dark Cloister running parallel to
and south of the Refectory.
Islip himself has left little record of his own tenure of the office,
but if the documents which attest the story of his successor may be
taken as illustrative of the Prior’s life in general, it must be assumed
that his share in the common life was occasional rather than constant,
while the existence of such officials as the Sub-prior and the third or
fourth Priors points to a delegation of duties and a system which may
have worked well in practice but was not consonant with the Benedictine
ideal. Those who are familiar with the course of the development of the
collegiate life which Henry VIII. designed for his new foundation at
Westminster in after-days will have observed the same forces at work in
the gradual isolation of the higher officials from the common table and
a somewhat quicker immersion in outside duties. It can hardly be doubted
that such forces are disruptive in tendency, not necessarily of the body
itself, but of the purpose and ideal for which it was called into being.
The Prior in fact found little difficulty in an occasional absence of
days together from the monastery. A pilgrimage to the Rood of Grace at
Boxley did not require any particular planning or arrangement, while the
record of visitors entertained by “your mastership,” as Prior Mane’s
faithful steward was wont to call him, shews the independent character
of the hospitality which he exercised. Whatever may have been the
frequency of his visits to the cloister Mane would seem seldom to have
dined in the Refectory. He appears indeed as no unfit ruler of the house
but he stands aloof from it none the less, a figure to be regarded by
the younger brethren with more awe than love. There is nothing to shew
that such a life was regarded as other than normal or that his immediate
predecessors had lived in other fashion.
Fascet had been Abbot little more than a fortnight when he signed an
indenture binding himself and the Convent to pay Henry VII. the sum of
five hundred pounds, one hundred of which was to be paid at the
following Christmas and the remainder in two equal portions at the end
of the ensuing years. The King had represented that he was about to be
put to great expense both in obtaining the papal license for and the
actual removal of the body of Henry VI. from Windsor to London. Moreover
the “diuerse other many and grete charges that our said souverain Lord
must bere by the chaunge and alteracion of suche thinges as his Highness
... hadde ordeyned and purposed to have made and done within the said
College of Wyndesore” formed an additional claim upon a Convent already
somewhat put to it to find money for other purposes.
The total sum was, however, paid in the year 1500-1, and John Islip as
the new Sacrist duly recorded it in his roll of account. The entry which
he made was apt to be misleading. Translated it would run thus: “Paid
for the removal of the body of the illustrious King Henry VI. from
Windsor to the monastery of the Blessed Peter, Westminster.” It was
doubtless this entry that subsequently gave rise to the tradition that
the actual removal took place and the body laid in some temporary
resting-place until the new chapel should be built as its shrine. The
fact that the papal brief for the removal was not granted until May
20th, 1504, would be by itself sufficient to disprove the tradition, but
if further proof were needed it could be found in the Will of Henry
VII., which was begun in 1509 and contained the note that the King
proposes _right shortely to translate ... the bodie and reliques of our
Uncle of blessed memorie King Henry the VI^{th.}_
For some unknown reason the translation was never carried out. It has
been suggested that the large sum of money demanded for canonisation
coupled with Henry’s parsimonious character proved sufficient to stay
the project; but there is no evidence for this conjecture and it seems
more reasonable to suppose that the canonisation was delayed until the
new chapel should be sufficiently ready to receive the body, otherwise
pilgrims would be flocking to Windsor rather than Westminster. Before
the chapel was thus ready Henry VII. died, and it may well be that his
successor had not the same interest in the matter as his father or the
same concern to defend his title to the throne.
One further item of interest may be noted here. The privy purse expenses
of Henry VII. contain payments amounting in all to more than sixty-eight
pounds to Master Esterfelde for making the tomb of Henry VI. at Windsor,
and a further payment to him of ten pounds for the actual conveyance of
this tomb to Westminster. Its ultimate fate, however, was never
recorded.
Whatever might be the final decision of the Convent Abbot Fascet can
have had little doubt as to the proper person to succeed him. In a deed
which is undated but which belongs probably to the year 1499 he
delegated to his Prior, John Islip, his full authority over the
monastery, and Islip became Abbot in fact if not yet in name. His end
was not far off, and in the summer of 1500 he died and was laid to rest
in the Chapel of St. John Baptist.
In due course the royal license was issued to Islip as Prior to proceed
to the election of an Abbot in his place. On October 26th the office of
Abbot was formally declared vacant in the Chapter House. In addition to
Islip some thirty-eight of the monks were present and also Dr. Richard
Rawlyns, a notary, Thomas Chamberlayn, and two representatives of the
law, Doctor Edward Vaughan and Dr. William Haryngton. The election was
fixed to take place on the following day though deliberation might be
prolonged if it seemed desirable. Mass of the Holy Spirit was then
solemnly sung at the high altar and afterwards all assembled in Chapter.
The gathering of the brethren was larger by five than on the previous
day, while Dr. Rawlyns, three legal representatives and a lay witness,
Edmund Dudley, were in attendance. Dr. Rawlyns preached a solemn
discourse on the text: _Instead of thy fathers thou shalt have children,
whom thou mayest make princes_. “Come, Holy Ghost” was then sung, with
the customary prayers following. The letters patent were read, the names
of the brethren present scrutinised, proclamation made at the Chapter
House door that any who had legal interest in the election should come
in, and then Islip as Prior solemnly warned any who lay under
excommunication, suspension or interdict, or who were for any other
reason disqualified to take part in the election, forthwith to depart.
Dr. Vaughan then formally inquired of the assembled Chapter by what
method they desired the election to go forward. The reply was _per viam
Spiritus Sancti_, and William Lambard, the senior of the monks present,
nominated John Islip. The choice was immediately acclaimed by all the
brethren without discussion or consultation of any kind.
Lambard at once proceeded to make record of the election. Brother John
Islip, he wrote, was a man careful and discreet, an ornament to the
priesthood in life and habit, wise alike in things spiritual and
temporal, and anxious to preserve and defend the rights of the monastery
of his choice. Procession was then formed to the high altar and _Te
Deum_ sung the while. On reaching the altar Dr. Vaughan made public
proclamation of the election. The brethren then returned to the Chapter
House where the two seniors present, Brothers Lambard and Charyng, were
deputed to carry the formal announcement of his election to the Prior’s
lodging whither the Abbot-elect had retired. Islip proclaimed himself
unworthy of such high office but eventually consented to election
_multipliciter se excusans_. He recorded his acceptance in this form:
“In the name of God, Amen. I, John Islip, monk of the monastery of St.
Peter Westminster directly attached to the Roman Church, of the order of
St. Benedict, vowed to the order and rule of the same in the said
monastery and canonically elected Abbot thereof, unwilling to resist the
divine will, at the urgent request of the Chapter of the said monastery
and its proctors do consent to my election, in honour of Almighty God,
the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Peter patron of the said monastery and the
glorious Confessor St. Edward the King.”
The Abbot-elect would seem to have celebrated the occasion by giving a
modest dinner to the Convent if we may judge from the long list of
articles of food purchased by the steward of his new household on that
day. The cost amounted to seventeen shillings and ten pence and the list
included “a potell of swet wyne”--bought perhaps to fill a loving-cup.
Some formalities, however, were necessary before the Abbot-elect could
be installed. The papal confirmation had to be obtained as also various
royal grants of the Abbot’s temporalities. Some of the latter are dated
November 13th and consist of mandates to the Crown escheators in various
counties to deliver the temporalities in their hands.
Matters were sufficiently forward for the installation to be fixed for
November 25th. The three days previous were spent by Islip at the
Abbot’s Manor of Neyte, close to Westminster, where various presents of
food were made to him by his new tenants.
On the morning of the day _when my lord was stalled_ he came from the
Chapel of St. Mary Magdalen at the far end of Tothill Street, then one
of the chief highways of Westminster, with a great number of nobles,
friends and servants and was met in the Conventual cemetery just outside
the west door of the church by five of the senior brethren, Charyng,
Waterden, Langley, Holand and Borough. Waterden handed him the oath
customarily taken by the Abbots to observe “all the rights, statutes and
laudable constitutions and customs of the monastery.” He first read it
through in a low tone and then recited it in a loud and clear voice.
Then there came to him the Sub-prior and the rest of the monks with
book, cross and pastoral staff. He knelt and kissed the book and so was
led in procession into the church where the installation was duly
performed. He subsequently gave a banquet at which probably the whole
Convent was entertained, its cost amounting to no less than £4 13s. 7d.
So he entered on his new dignities. He was but thirty-six years old and
there were no less than sixteen of the brethren who were his seniors in
point of profession. Twenty years had seen him pass from the
country-bred novice to the high position of a mitred Abbot at the
opening of a century destined to bring to the Church changes greater
than any that had happened to it since St. Augustine first landed on the
shores of Kent.