¹ Dom David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England (Cambridge, England 1940) 208.Google Scholar

² For a list of the abbeys, see Knowles, , Monastic Order 707-9, Knowles, The Religious Houses of Medieval England (London 1940) 73–8, and especially David Knowles and Neville Hadcock, R., Medieval Religious Houses, England and Wales (London 1953) 104-18. The latter is a thorough revision and amplification of Religious Houses of Medieval England and will long prove of inestimable value to students of medieval Englishmonastic history. On the Order in England and Wales, see Knowles, , Monastic Order 227-66, 346-62, 632-48 (down to 1216); Knowles, The Religious Orders in England (vol. I, Cambridge, England 1950, reprint of ed. of 1948) 64-77 (on the agrarian economy of the Cistercians in England, 1216-1340); Cooke, A. M., ‘The Settlement of the Cistercians in England,’ English Historical Review 8 (1893) 625–76; Fletcher, J. S., The Cistercians in Yorkshire (London 1919); Mullin, F. A., A History of the Work of the Cistercians in Yorkshire (1131-1300) (Washington, D.C. 1932); O’Sullivan, J. F., Cistercian Settlements in Wales and Monmouthshire, 1140-1540 (Fordham University Studies, History Series 2; New York 1947); and, in the Victoria County Histories that have appeared to date, the articles on individual religious houses, some of which are excellent.Google Scholar

— Bibliographical details concerning the published records of some monastic house more frequently referred to in this article are found as follows (numbers refer to footnotes below):

Buckfast 29

Byland 14

Furness 17, 55

Fountains 11

Holm Cultram 20

Kingswood 31

Kirkstall 12

Louth Park 21

Margam 32

Meaux 13

Neath 32

Newminster 19

Rievaulx 15

Robertsbridge 26

Roche 14

Sallay 16

Tiltey 25

Yale Royal 22

Wardon 24

Whalley 18

³ Joseph-Marie Canivez, Dom (ed.), Statuta capitulorum generalium ordinis cisterciensis ab anno 1116 ad annum 1786 (8 vols. Louvain 1933-41) 1.14 (1134 I) no. 5.Google Scholar

⁴ Ibid. 1.14-15 (1134 I) no. 9.Google Scholar

⁵ Donnelly, J. S., The Decline of the Medieval Cistercian Laybrotherhood (Fordham University Studies, History Series 3; New York 1949) 17. For studies on lay-brother origins and development, see ibid. 1-14. On the Cistercian laybrotherhood, see, in addition, Eberhard Hoffmann, Das Konverseninstitut des Cisterzienser-ordens in seinem Ursprung und seiner Organisation (Freiburg, Schweiz 1905) and R. P. [J.] Othon [Ducourneau], ‘De l'institution et des us des convers dans l'ordre de Cîteaux (XII^e et XIII^e siècles),’ Association bourguignonne des sociétés savantes. Congrès de 1927, Saint Bernard et son temps. Recueil de mémoires et communications présentés au congrès (2 vols. Dijon 1928-29) II 139-201.Google Scholar

⁶ See Donnelly, , op. cit. 22-60.Google Scholar

⁷ David, Dom Knowles suggested this undertaking in a book review: EHR 66 (1951) 136–37.Google Scholar

⁸ Taxatio ecclesiastica Angliae et Walliae auctoritate Nicholai, P. IV. Circa A.D. 1291 (Record Commission 1802).Google Scholar

⁹ Valor ecclesiasticus, edd. Caley, J. and Hunter, J. (6 vols. London 1825-34); Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII (21 vols. London 1862-1910) vols. 10-15 (edd. Gairdner, James and Brodie, R. H.); Gasquet, F.A., ‘Overlooked Testimonies to the Character of the English Monasteries on the Eve of Their Suppression,’ Dublin Review 114 (April 1894) 245-77; Clay, J. W. (ed.), Yorkshire Monasteries. Suppression Papers (Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series, vol. 48, 1912); Purvis, J. S. (ed.), ‘A Selection of Monastic Rentals and Dissolution Papers,’ in Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series, vol. 80, for 1931 (Miscellanea 3) 1-148; Purvis, J. S. (ed.), Select XVI Century Causes in Tithe from the York Diocesan Registry (Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series, vol. 114, 1947).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. Dugdale, William (new ed. by Caley, John, Ellis, Henry and Bandinel, Bulkeley, 6 vols. in 8, London 1846).Google Scholar

¹¹ Memorials of the Abbey of St. Mary of Fountains, edd. Walbran, J. R. and Fowler, J. T. (3 vols., 1863, 1878, 1918; Publications of the Surtees Society, vols. 42, 67, 130); vol. 3 contains the Bursar's Books, 1456-1459 and the Memorandum Book of Thomas Swynton, 1446-1458. Also, Abstracts of the Charters and Other Documents Contained in the Chartulary of the Cistercian Abbey of Fountains in the West Riding of the County of York, ed. Lancaster, W. T. (2 vols. Leeds 1915). See St. John Hope, W. H., ‘Fountains Abbey,’ Yorkshire Archaeological Journal 15 (1900) 269-402.Google Scholar

¹² The Coucher Book of the Cistercian Abbey of Kirkstall in the West Riding of the County of York, edd. Lancaster, W. T. and Baildon, W. P. (Publications of the Thoresby Society, vol. 8, for 1904); John Stansfeld, ‘Rent-Roll of Kirkstall Abbey,’ Publications of the Thoresby Society 1 (1891, Miscellanea) 1-21 (bursar's office account, 1459-60); Kitson, F. R. and others (edd.), ‘Charters Relating to the Possessions of Kirkstall Abbey in Allerton,’ Publications of the Thoresby Society 4, (1895, Miscellanea) 42–59 (25 charters); Clark, E. K. (ed.), ‘The Foundation of Kirkstall Abbey,’ ibid. 169-208 (Latin text and English trans. of Fundacio Abbathie de Kyrkestall). Google Scholar

¹³ Chronica monasterii de Melsa a fundatione usque ad annum 1396, ed. Bond, E. A. (3 vols. London 1866-68; R. S.) For comment, see Cox, J. C., ‘The Annals of the Abbey of Meaux,’ Transactions of the East Riding Antiquarian Society 1 (1893) 1–45; Earle, A., Essays upon the History of Meaux Abbey and Some Principles of Mediaeval Land Tenure (Lon on 1906).Google Scholar

¹⁴ Addy, S. O., ‘Roche Abbey Charters. Transcripts with Introduction and Notes’ (ed. Hall, T. W.), Transactions of the Hunter Archaeological Society (Sheffield), vol. 4, pt. 3 (1932-34) 226-48 (16 charters); Ragg, F. W., ‘Charters to St. Peter's (St. Leonard's) Hospital, York, and to Byland Abbey,’ Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, n.s. 9 (1909) 236–51 (7 charters of St. Peter's and a few remarks about Byland); Ragg, ‘Charters to Byland Abbey,’ ibid. 252-70 (5 charters with trans. and notes).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Cartularium abbathiae de Rievalle ordinis Cisterciensis fundatae anno MCXXXII, ed. Atkinson, J. C. (Publications of the Surtees Society 83, 1889).Google Scholar

¹⁶ The Chartulary of the Cistercian Abbey of St. Mary of Sallay in Craven, ed. McNulty, Joseph (2 vols. 1933-34, Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series, vols. 87, 90) The compotus of 1481 is in Whitaker, T. D., The History and Antiquities of the Deanery of Craven in the County of York (3rd ed. Leeds and London 1878) 63–69. It was erroneously dated by Whitaker as of 1381; see Chart. of Sallay II197-98, and Joseph McNulty, ‘Sallay Abbey (1148-1536),’ Transactions of the Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society 54 (1939) 200-1.Google Scholar

¹⁷ The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, J. C. (vol. 1) and John Brownbill (vol. 2) (2 vols. in 6 pts. 1886-1919, Chetham Society, Remains Historical and Literary Connected with the Palatine Counties of Lancaster and Chester, n.s. 9, 11, 14, 74, 76, 78); also, for a lost folio, The Cowcher Book of Furness Abbey: Transcript of the Lost Folio 70, ed. Flower, C. T. (1935, Chetham Society, Remains, n.s. 94); see the article by Powicke, F. M. on Furness, Victoria County History, Lancaster II (1908) 114–31.Google Scholar

¹⁸ The Coucher Book or Chartulary of Whalley Abbey, ed. Hulton, W. A. (4 vols, 1847-49, Chetham Society, Remains 10, 11, 16, 20); Act Book of the Ecclesiastical Court of Whalley, 1510-1538, ed. Cooke, A. M. (1901, Chetham Society, Remains, n.s. 44). Several statements of receipts and expenses, a list of members of the monastic community, and two compoti (for 1478 and 1521) are in Whitaker, T. D., An History of the Original Parish of Whalley and Honor of Clitheroe in the Counties of Lancaster and York (3 pts. 1800-01).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monaslerio ordinis Cisterciensis fundatae anno MCXXXVII, ed. Fowler, J. T. (1878, Publications of the Surtees Society 66, for 1876).Google Scholar

²⁰ The Register and Records of Holm Cultram, edd. Francis Grainger and Collingwood, W. G. (1929, Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, Record Series 7); see the article on the abbey by Wilson, James, Victoria County History, Cumberland II (1905) 162–73.Google Scholar

²¹ Edmund Venables (ed.), Chronicon abbatie de Parco Lude. The Chronicle of Louth Park Abbey with Appendix of Documents (trans. Maddison, A. R.) (1891, Publications of the Lincolnshire Record Society 1, for 1889).Google Scholar

²² The Ledger-Book of Vale Royal Abbey, ed. Brownbill, John (1914, Record Society for the Publication of Original Documents Relating to Lancashire and Cheshire 68); The Book of the Abbot of Combermere, 1289 to 1529, ed. Hall, James (1896, Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, Publications 31, for 1895). The information in the latter is unfortunately limited to Nantwich.Google Scholar

²³ Wrottesley, G., ‘The Chartulary of Dieulacres Abbey,’ Collections for a History of Staffordshire, ed. Salt, William Archaeological Society, n.s. 9 (1906) 293–366.Google Scholar

²⁴ The Cartulary of the Cistercian Abbey of Old Wardon, Bedfordshire, ed. Fowler, G. H. (John Rylands Library and Bedfordshire Historical Record Society, Manchester 1931).Google Scholar

²⁵ Waller, W. C., ‘Records of Tiltey Abbey: An Account of Some Preserved at Easton Lodge,’ Transactions of the Essex Archaeological Society, n.s. 8 (1903) 352–62; 9 (1906) 118-21.Google Scholar

²⁶ Calendar of Charters and Documents Relating to the Abbey of Robertsbridge Co: Sussex Preserved at Penshurst among the Muniments of Lord de Lisle and Dudley (London 1873); see Cooper, G. M., ‘Notices of the Abbey of Robertsbridge,’ Sussex Archaeological Collections, Sussex Archaeological Society 8 (1856) 141-76.Google Scholar

²⁷ Unique Cistercian regule compoti and two accounts of the grange of Faringdon in Berkshire are in Denholm, N.-Young, Seignorial Administration in England (Oxford Historical Series, Oxford 1927) 169–76.Google Scholar

²⁸ de Birch, G. W., ‘Collections towards the History of the Cistercian Abbey of Stanley, in Wiltshire,’ Wilishire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 15 (1875) 240–307.Google Scholar

²⁹ Hingeston-Randolph, F. C. (ed.), ‘The Cartulary of Buckfast Abbey (A Fragment),’ in The Register of John de Grandisson, Bishop of Exeter (A.D. 1327-1369), pt. 3 (London 1899) 1563–1610; see Stephan, John, O.S.B., Buckfast Abbey, Historical Guide (Buckfast 1924).Google Scholar

³⁰ Hugo, Thomas, The Charters and Other Hitherto Inedited Archives of Cleeve, Clyve or Clyff Abbey, in Somersetshire (Taunton 1856); see also, Walcott, C.M.E., ‘The Cistercian Abbey of St. Mary of the Cliff, Old Cleeve, Somersetshire,’ Journal of the British Archaeological Association 31 (1875) 402-19.Google Scholar

³¹ The Cartulary and Historical Notes of the Cistercian Abbey of Flaxley, Otherwise Called Dene Abbey in the County of Gloucester (Exeter 1887); Perkins, V. R. (ed.) and Jeayes, J. H. (trans.), ‘Documents Relating to the Cistercian Monastery of St. Mary, Kingswood,’ Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 22 (for 1899) 178-256.Google Scholar

³² Register and Chronicle of the Abbey of Aberconway, ed. Ellis, H. (1847, Camden Miscellany 1). Clark, G. T. (ed.), ‘Contributions towards a Cartulary of Margam,’ Archaeologia Cambrensis, 3rd s. 13 (1867) 311–34, 14 (1868) 24-59, 182-96, 245-82; Cartae et alia munimenta quae ad dominium de Glamorgan pertinent, ed. Clark, G. T. (4 vols., Dowlais and Cardiff 1885-93); Thomas Gray, ‘Notes on the Granges of Margam Abbey,’ Journal of the British Archaeological Association, n.s. 9 (1903) 161-81, 11 (1905) 11-29, 85-108; Birch, W. de G., A History of Margam Abbey (London 1897). Francis, G. G. (ed.), Original Charters and Materials for a History of Neath and Its Abbey (Swansea 1845); Birch, W. de G., A History of Neath Abbey (Neath 1902). Roberts, G., ‘Documents and Charters Connected with the History of Strata Florida Abbey,’ Archaeologia Cambrensis, 1st s. 3 (1848) 191-213.Google Scholar

³³ Usus conversorum c. 6, in Ph. Guignard, (ed.), Les monuments primitifs de la règle cistercienne publiés d'après les manuscrits de l'abbaye de Cîteaux (Analecta Divionensia 10; Dijon 1878) 281–2.Google Scholar

³⁴ Canivez, Statuta 1.87 (1180) no. 6, 297-98 (1204) no. 11, 307-08 (1205) no. 7. The grange of Steyninges belonging to Furness had a chantry chapel; Coucher Book of Whalley 427 no. 13, 428-29 no. 15. There was also a chapel on Margam's grange of Melis where permission to celebrate Mass was granted by the bishop in 1239; Gray, ‘Notes on the Granges of Margam,’ loc. cit. 165-71.Google Scholar

³⁵ Canivez, Statuta 2.398 (1253) no. 37, 418 (1255) no. 36.Google Scholar

³⁶ Ibid. 1.14 (1134 I) no. 5.Google Scholar

³⁷ Ibid. 1.20 (1134 I) no. 32.Google Scholar

³⁸ Ibid. 3.175 (1278) no. 1.Google Scholar

³⁹ Chart. of Sallay II 64 no. 501.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Ibid. II 19-20 no. 419.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ibid. II 14-16.Google Scholar

⁴² Bishop, T. A. M., ‘Monastic Granges in Yorkshire,’ EHR 51 (1936) 209.Google Scholar

⁴³ Ibid. 213.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Chron. de Melsa I 85; EHR 51.213.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Chron. de Melsa I 101; Bishop (EHR 51.213) estimates about 250 acres.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Chron. de Melsa I 204.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Ibid. 163-64.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Chart. of Fountains I 110-11.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ EHR 51.209.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Ibid. Google Scholar

⁵¹ Chron. de Parco Lude xxvii-xxviii.Google Scholar

⁵² Ledger-Book of Vale Royal 162-63.Google Scholar

⁵³ Clark, Cartae IV 153.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Coucher Book of Furness I 633-37 (valuation), II 585-662 (rental).Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Beck, T. A., Annales Furnesienses, History and Antiquities of the Abbey of Furness (London 1844) 234.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Coucher Book of Whalley 335-37, 1248-52.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Chart. de Novo Monasterio 300-1 (also, Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 400): ‘Dominus Ranulphus de Merlay, principalis fundator noster, et Juliana uxor ejus, qui nobis contulerunt situm hujus abbatiae, grangiam de Hulwane … Rogerus Bertram … qui primus dimisit nobis ad firmam grangias de Heylan et de Hortune, et partem Peteric … Rogerus Bertram tertius, qui vendidit nobis praedicta loca ex integro, … qui etiam confirmavit nobis grangiam de Aldeworth, quam nobis vendidit Petrus sacerdos … Dominus Everardus de Ros, qui nobis contulit grangiam de Stratton… Will. Coniers, qui commutavit nobis grangiam de Caldewell, qui proprio nomine dicitur Scarplaue, pro terris in Clifton.’Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Donnelly, , op. cit . 44-52.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Registrum epistolarum fratris Johannis Peckham, archiepiscopi Cantuariensis, ed. Martin, C. T. (3 vols., London 1882-85; R.S.) II 726-7, 769-70, ep. 554.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ O'Sullivan, op. cit. 56-57.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Ibid. 17.Google Scholar

⁶² Register of Holm Cultram 53-54 no. 139.Google Scholar

⁶³ Ibid. 54-55 no. 141a.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Knowles, Monastic Order 670-71, 675-76; O'Sullivan, op. cit. 49-50.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ EHR 51.212-13.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Ibid. 213; Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 305.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 299 no. 21.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ EHR 51.209.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Clark, Pub. Thoresby Soc. 4.174-75.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Ibid. 184-85.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 351.Google Scholar

⁷² Bishop, EHR 51.209.Google Scholar

⁷³ Chart. of Sallay I 129 no. 207. De Lacy wrote: ‘Scias tamen quod predicti monachi concesserunt nobis quod homines qui modo sedent super terram illam usque in estatem proximam sustinebunt.’Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Ibid. 134-35 no. 219.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Powicke, V.C.H. Lancs. II 127.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ EHR 51.213.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Chart. of Fountains 59 no. 65.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Ibid. 449-50 no. 25.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Ibid. 584 no. 6.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Ibid. 718 no. 3.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Ibid. 742 no. 2.Google Scholar

⁸² Ibid. 648 no. 9.Google Scholar

⁸³ Coucher Book of Whalley 1-2.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Ibid. 385-86, 392.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Ibid. 419-20.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Ibid. 467-68.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Ibid. 801-02.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Information on manors in the hands of Cistercians abounds in the sources.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ References to villeins in chartularies and other sources are legion, and some of the details are particularly interesting in relation to the history of villeinage and especially its decline.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Bishop, , EHR 51.211-12.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Ibid. 212.Google Scholar

⁹² Ibid. Google Scholar

⁹³ Also, in Chron. de Melsa; see below, p. 433-435.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Chart. of Fountains 90 no. 1.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Ibid. 90 no. 2.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Ibid. 91 no. 4.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Ibid. 262 no. 8.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Ibid. 264 no. 18.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Ibid. 264-65 no. 21.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Ibid. 390 no. 36; also 384-85 nos. 15, 16; 399 nos. 79, 81, 82; 400 no. 85.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ For the regime of the lay brother, see in general the Usus conversorum in Guignard, op. cit. (n. 33 supra) 276-87.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Beck, Annales Furnes. 254; Coucher Book of Furness I 490-92 no. 306, indenture between William and the abbey dated October 8, 1318; see also 494-95 no. 309.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Cart. of Wardon 119-20 no. 163 (dated c. 1180-1200).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Hingeston-Randolph, ‘Cart. of Buckfast,’ loc. cit. 1608.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Chart. de Novo Monasterio xviii, 164.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Chron. de Melsa I 432-33: ‘… incepit aliquantulum perpendere versutias conversorum nostrorum, et, ipsorum proterviam temperare satagens, ipsos officiis servientium deputavit, et eos custodiis porcorum, animalium, et operibus carucariis tradens, et alia hujusmodi opera subire coegit. Alios vero eorum latomos, alios carpentarios, alios vitrifices, atque alios plumbarios et caetera hujusmodi ordinabat, a custodia locorum et grangiarum ipsos penitus absolvendo.’ On the disciplinary disturbances caused by lay brothers, see Donnelly, , op. cit. 22-37.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Chart. of Fountains 768 no. 16.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Coucher Book of Whalley 709 no. 81, dated 1322; see also 720 for a similar agreement.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Ibid. 518 no. 32, dated 31 Edward I.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Chart. de Novo Monasterio 57, dated 1250; on the saltworks, see pp. xix, 54-55.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Calendar of Robertsbridge 45-46 no. 147, 47 no. 151.Google Scholar

¹¹² Chart. of Fountains 616. Later, the right of the abbey was recognized and the dispute settled.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Baildon, W. P., Notes on the Religious and Secular Houses of Yorkshire (2vols. Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series 17, for 1894, and 81, for 1931) I 183-84 no. 1.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Coucher Book of Kirkstall 22-23 no. 27.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Beck, Annales Furnes. 246.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Coucher Book of Furness II 344-49 no. 12.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Ibid. II 350-51 no. 15.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Ibid. II 267-68 no. 56.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Ibid. II 268-69 no. 57, dated 1305-15.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ Baildon, Notes I 108 no. 7.Google Scholar

¹²¹ Chart. of Sallay I 46-47.Google Scholar

¹²² Clark, Cartae IV 222-23 no. 1182; Gray, Jour. Brit. Archaeol. Assoc. n.s. 11.18-19.Google Scholar

¹²³ ‘Documents of Kingswood,’ loc. cit. 209-13 no. 24.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Ibid. 195-99.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Ibid. 246-47 no. 42.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Ibid. 233-34.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ Ibid. 232-33 no. 33.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Ibid. 252-53 no. 45.Google Scholar

¹²⁹ Ibid. 202.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ Seignorial Admin. 169-74 (regule), 174-76 (compoti).Google Scholar

¹³¹ Denholm-Young, , whose work appeared in 1937, seems to have been mistaken in saying, ‘No other Cistercian accounts for this period are known’ (ibid. 122), for the Kingswood accounts, including the account of the warden of four granges dating from 1288-89, were published in 1899.Google Scholar

¹³² Dugdale, , Mon. Ang. V 682.Google Scholar

¹³³ Denholm-Young, op. cit. 169.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Ibid. 176.Google Scholar

¹³⁵ In general, see Donnelly, , op. cit. 41-44, 51-52, 56-57.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Canivez, Statuta 1.19 (1134 I) no. 26.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ Ibid. 1.346 (1208) no. 5: ‘De terris qui minus utiles fuerint aut sic remotae quod utiliter excoli non possint, sic dispensat Capitulum generale, ut liceat iis qui tales habuerint dare ad medietatem vel aliter prout poterunt competenter.’Google Scholar

¹³⁸ Ibid. 1.428-29 (1214) no 58.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ Ibid. 1.448 (1215) no. 64.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Donnelly, , op. cit. 43.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Canivez, , Statuta 1.517 (1220) no. 5: ‘De grangiis et tenis minus utilibus colonis ad tempus concedendis, permittitur abbatibus ut cum consilio seniorum suorum, patrum abbatum vel visitatorum, si patrum haberi non possit copia, faciant super hoc quod iussum fuerit faciendum.’Google Scholar

¹⁴² Ibid. 2.31 (1224) no. 10: ‘Indulgetur abbatibus Ordinis nostri…, qui sibi crediderint expedire, dare saecularibus terras, vineas et etiam grangias, et alias possessiones ad excolendum cum consensu et voluntate conventus sui et patris abbatis, vel visitatoris…’Google Scholar

¹⁴³ Ibid. 3.261 (1293) no. 2.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ See Donnelly, , op. cit. 43-51.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁵ Potthast no. 25200; Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 233-34 no. 12: indulgemus, ut de terris vestris cultis et incultis ad ordinem vestrum spectantibus, quas aliis concessistis vel concedetis imposterum excolendas de quibus tamen aliquis decimas seu primicias non percepit, nullus a vobis seu cultoribus terrarum ipsarum, aut quibuscumque aliis decimas seu primicias exigere vel extorquere praesumat.’Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ See Donnelly, , op. cit. 51, 55.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁷ Canivez, Statuta 3.309-10 (1303) no. 4: ‘… ex quo indulto speramus bona non modica Ordini in posterum eventura…’Google Scholar

¹⁴⁸ Register of Holm Cultram 101; Coucher Book of Furness II 793 (I 105, 550).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁹ Clark, , Cartae IV 185 no. 1155.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁰ Ibid. IV 188-89 no. 1157.Google Scholar

¹⁵¹ Calendar of Robertsbridge 115 no. 319.Google Scholar

¹⁵² Chron. de Melsa I 383: ‘Sed, quia plerisque personis ordinis venit in dubium qualiter illa verba in dicto privilegio, « De quibus aliquis decimas seu primitias non percepit,» secundum verum intellectum debeant effectui debito mancipari, nec declaratum fuit give decimae seu primitiae aliquo tempore elapso seu post praescriptionem perceptae non fuerunt, idem privilegium in plerisque domibus ordinis nostri nullum effectum in ejus prosecutione est sortitum. Aliqui tamen secundum tenorem dicti privilegii in plaeitando sententias definitivas pro se assequi meruerunt.’Google Scholar

¹⁵³ For which see below, p. 424.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁴ Canivez, , Statuta 3.330 (1315) no. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁵ Ibid. 3.412-13 no. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁶ Ibid. 3.414 no. 6. Concerning the reform statutes, see Mahn, Jean-Berthold, Le pape Benoit XII et les Cisterciens (Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études, fasc. 295; Paris 1949) and Joseph McNulty, ‘Constitutions for the Reform of the Cistercian Order, 1335,’ Trans. of the Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society 57 (1943-44) 158-67.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁷ See Donnelly, , op. cit. 56-57.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁸ Canivez, , Statuta 3.486-87 (1344) no. 34.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁹ Ibid. 3.488 (1344) no. 40.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁰ Ibid. 3.489-90 (1344) no. 44.Google Scholar

¹⁶¹ Ibid. 3.490 (1344) no. 45.Google Scholar

¹⁶² Ibid. 3.490-91 (1344) no. 48.Google Scholar

¹⁶³ Ibid. 3.492 (1344) no. 57.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ Ibid. 3.493 (1344) no. 58.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁵ On the English Cistercians at this time, see Graham, Rose, ‘The Great Schism and the English Monasteries of the Cistercian Order, * EHR 44 (1929) 373–87. The question of tithes is not treated.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁶ Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers Relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Papal Letters, ed. Bliss, W. H. et al. (5 vols. London 1893-1904) V (1396-1404) 161.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁷ Burton, John, Monasticon Eboracense: and the Ecclesiastical History of Yorkshire (York 1758) 147.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁸ Beck, (Annales Furnes. 92) says in regard to the privilege, ‘… finding however that this privilege was strongly opposed, the Cistertians [sic] petitioned against it in Parliament in the year 1400…’ It is incredible that they would initiate such action.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁹ Ibid. 92; Rotuli Parliamentorum III 464-65.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁰ Beck, Annales Furnes. 93.Google Scholar

¹⁷¹ Calendar of Entries, Papal Letters V 516. But the translation of one very important phrase (italics mine) in Boniface IX's paraphrasing of the exemption by Boniface VIII is unusual: ‘… Boniface VIII… granted the order that from their lands, cultivated and uncultivated, granted by them to be cultivated, provided that from the cultivators they did not take tithes or first-fruits, no one should exact the same from them or from such cultivators.’ See above, p. 421 f.Google Scholar

¹⁷² Calendar of Entries, Papal Letters V 516: ‘At the recent petition of the Cistercian abbot and convent of St. Mary's Kyngiswode — containing that because such letters have been granted to the order in general, they are in many ways molested in the matter of the above privileges…’Google Scholar

¹⁷³ Canivez, Statuta 4.76 (1405) no. 19.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁴ Ibid. 4.314 (1427) no. 26, 618 (1449) no. 22.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁵ Canivez, Statuta 3.3 (1262) no. 10: ‘Item, statuit et ordinat Capitulum generale quod cum aliquis abbas alicui monacho vel converso suo aliquam grangiam suam ad firmam concedit, soluto censu in quo tenetur monachus vel conversus abbatiae, residuum bonorum sibi commissae grangiae non appropriet, nec praeter ordinationem abbatis aliquid inde facere audeat vel praesumat.’Google Scholar

¹⁷⁶ EHR 51.197-98.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁷ Canivez, Statuta 2.477 (1261) no. 10: ‘Cum per diversis casibus seu necessitatibus frequenter contingere soleat quod abbates grangias in manibus saecularium sub annuo censu sine aliis modis committant… ‘Google Scholar

¹⁷⁸ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 310-11 no. 76: ‘Et grangias suas de Sutton, Sleningford, Galghagh, Aldeburgh cum Nuttewith, Flattewith et Tanfeldridding, Bramlay, Kilnesay, Cayton, cum le Gollescroft et stagno vivarii sui ibidem Thorpunderwodde, Marton, cum Caldewell, Balderbi, Buskeby, Arneford, Nethirbordelay, Overbordelay, Couton, Grenebergh, Merston, Kirkebywist, Bradelay, Malghom, Brenbem…’Google Scholar

¹⁷⁹ Chart. of Fountains 213.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁰ Chart. of Fountains 111; Walbran (Memorials of Fountains I 203 n. 2) mentioned this license given by Brother Bernard and intended to print it.Google Scholar

¹⁸¹ Chart. of Fountains 111-12.Google Scholar

¹⁸² Ibid. 112.Google Scholar

¹⁸³ EHR 51.197.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁴ Chart. of Fountains 781.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁵ Ibid. 314-15: ‘… whereas the said tenants of Winkeslay [a vill] have demanded from the said tenants of the Abbot a part of the tax on wool granted to the King in the 15th year of his reign for the ninth of sheaves, fleeces and lambs granted in the same year, it has been agreed that the tenants of Galghagh, having this time paid a sum of money … for the sheaves growing the same year, in full for that portion of the land of the said manor which is in Winkeslay, this is not to prejudice them in the future…; but if the said manor of Galghagh shall be in the hands of the Abbot or his successors, not leased to lay tenants, they shall not be liable for such payment,’Google Scholar

¹⁸⁶ Memorials of Fountains I 203-5 no. 42.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁷ Ibid.: ‘Petitionem … continentem quod cum haberent multas grangias, ante guerras Scottorum et Anglorum, nunc perditas, combustas, et quasi ad nichilum redactas, quas non possunt reedificare … habuerunt et habent [granges previously named] ad eorum monasterium pertinentes, quae per hostiles incursus Scottorum, guerrarum incommoda, pestilencias mortalitatum et tempestatum in illis partibus pridem contingencium, et alios casus fortuitos adeo fuerunt et sunt in suis edificiis collapsae; ipsarumque terrae dudum fertiles et comodiferae, quasi penitus ad sterilitatem sunt redactae…’Google Scholar

¹⁸⁸ Purvis, J. S. (ed.), Monastic Chancery Proceedings (Yorkshire) (Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series 88 [1934]) 40 no. 36.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁹ Memorials of Fountains I 242-50 no. 65.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁰ Ibid. I 219-20 no. 52.Google Scholar

¹⁹¹ Ibid. III 7-8 (1456-57), 42 (1457-58), 82-83 (1458-59).Google Scholar

¹⁹² Ibid. III 7-8, 42, 86-87.Google Scholar

¹⁹³ Letters and Papers of Henry VIII 14, pt. 2.208-9 no. 589.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁴ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 311-12 no. 77; Memorials of Fountains I 254-55.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁵ See Dugdale, , Mon. Ang. V 291.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁶ The Atkinson family was long connected with the abbey in such capacities. One Thomas Atkinson, perhaps father of the above-mentioned Thomas, was made keeper of Haddockstones in 1491; William Atkinson was keeper of Lofthouse, Edward IV 21; and Atkinson, Richard, keeper of the dairy at Newhouse, 2 Richard III to 3 Henry VII. See Memorials of Fountains 1 232 n. 1.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁷ Ibid. Google Scholar

¹⁹⁸ Ibid. 233.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁹ Ibid. 233-35.Google Scholar

²⁰⁰ Purvis, Select Causes (n. 9 supra) 1-2 no. 1.Google Scholar

²⁰¹ Ibid. 6.Google Scholar

²⁰² Ibid. 7.Google Scholar

²⁰³ Ibid. 3.Google Scholar

²⁰⁴ Chron. de Melsa II xxii, 175Google Scholar

²⁰⁵ Ibid. III lxi.Google Scholar

²⁰⁶ Ibid. III lx-lxi. The receipts for 1399 (ibid. III 275) vary little from those of 1396, being £626 15s.Google Scholar

²⁰⁷ According to the Ministers’ Accounts, 31 Henry VIII, Saltaghe grange was valued at £10; More grange, 10s.; Okton, £5 6s. 8d.: and Blaunchemarle, £3. Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 397-98.Google Scholar

²⁰⁸ EHR 51.197-98.Google Scholar

²⁰⁹ Coucher Book of Kirkstall 330; referred to in the record of an inquisition, March 23, 1329.Google Scholar

²¹⁰ Stansfeld, ‘Rent-Roll of Kirkstall,’ loc. cit. 10-13.Google Scholar

²¹¹ Ibid. 17. Stansfeld estimated that the demesne ‘must have been very considerable.’Google Scholar

²¹² Baildon, Notes, n. 113 supra) 191-92 no. 8.Google Scholar

²¹³ Ibid. 192 no. 13.Google Scholar

²¹⁴ Chart. of Sallay I 154-55, dated Jan. 16, 1323-24; Coucher Book of Whalley 99-101 no. 33, dated 1333.Google Scholar

²¹⁵ Chart. of Sallay I 118-19 no. 191, dated Aug. 13, 1371.Google Scholar

²¹⁶ Ibid. I 136-37 no. 221, dated Aug. 5, 1392.Google Scholar

²¹⁷ Ibid. II 51 no. 476, the indenture being dated Christmas Eve, 1362.Google Scholar

²¹⁸ Cart. de Rievalle 423, App. no. 102.Google Scholar

²¹⁹ Ragg, ‘Charters to Byland,’ loc. cit. 256-57.Google Scholar

²²⁰ Purvis, Select Causes 119 no. 34.Google Scholar

²²¹ Coucher Book of Furness I 661-62, 604, 316-17, 633-37; II 178-79, 593-94, 629.Google Scholar

²²² Ibid. I 661-62 no. 428.Google Scholar

²²³ Ibid. I 604 no. 394.Google Scholar

²²⁴ Ibid. I 633-37; Beck, Annales Furnes. 231.Google Scholar

²²⁵ Coucher Book of Furness II 178-79 no. 12.Google Scholar

²²⁶ Ibid. II 261 no. 51, dated 1300-30; a grant of common of pasture in Hackinsall and Preesall for the monks’ cattle of Stalmine grange.Google Scholar

²²⁷ Ibid. II 427 no. 104.Google Scholar

²²⁸ Ibid. II 86 no. 6, dated May 28, 1349.Google Scholar

²²⁹ Ibid. II 357-60.Google Scholar

²³⁰ Ibid. II 652. In the rental of 1537, after the suppression, account is rendered for ‘£40 from the above-named Henry, earl of Cumberland, for the farm of the manor or grange of Wynterburn in Yorkshire with all the lands and tenements, rents, reversions, and services, meadows, feeding-grounds, and pastures …, with all and singular their appurtenances lying and being in Wynterburn, Asshton, Flaxbye and Heton, thus demised to him at farm…’Google Scholar

²³¹ Ibid. I 636.Google Scholar

²³² Ibid. II 578-79.Google Scholar

²³³ Ibid. II 643-44.Google Scholar

²³⁴ Ibid. II 180-84 no. 14.Google Scholar

²³⁵ Ibid. II 187 no. 6.Google Scholar

²³⁶ Ibid. II 629.Google Scholar

²³⁷ Ibid. II 588, 593 94, 597-98.Google Scholar

²³⁸ Ibid. II 642-43.Google Scholar

²³⁹ Coucher Book of Whalley 382 no. 8. One may at least speculate on whether the monks intended to rent in view of the legislation of the general chapter permitting renting in 1208.Google Scholar

²⁴⁰ Ibid. 475-76 no. 9.Google Scholar

²⁴¹ Ibid. 478 no. 11.Google Scholar

²⁴² Ibid. 547-48 no. 11.Google Scholar

²⁴³ Ibid. 1222.Google Scholar

²⁴⁴ Ibid. 1158-61.Google Scholar

²⁴⁵ Whitaker, History of Whalley 56-57 (statement of 1320 on occasion of visitation by abbot of Cumbermere); 61-62 (statement of 1366 on occasion of visitation by abbot of Rievaulx).Google Scholar

²⁴⁶ Ibid. 62.Google Scholar

²⁴⁷ Ibid. 80, 85.Google Scholar

²⁴⁸ Ibid. 1248-50, 1250-51, 1242-43, 1252.Google Scholar

²⁴⁹ Chron. de Parco Lude 72-74.Google Scholar

²⁵⁰ Ibid. 68-69, 51.Google Scholar

²⁵¹ Ibid. 67-68.Google Scholar

²⁵² Ibid. 70; Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 415.Google Scholar

²⁵³ Ledger-Book of Vale Royal 162-63.Google Scholar

²⁵⁴ Ibid. 163.Google Scholar

²⁵⁵ Dugdale, , Mon. Ang. V 701, dated March 21, 30 Henry VIII.Google Scholar

²⁵⁶ Waller, , ‘Records of Tiltey,’ loc. cit. 119. Unfortunately, the editor gives an abstract that is neither complete nor clear, rather than the full text of this lease.Google Scholar

²⁵⁷ Ibid. 121.Google Scholar

²⁵⁸ See above, p. 419.Google Scholar

²⁵⁹ Calendar of Entries, Papal Letters V (1396-1404) 514.Google Scholar

²⁶⁰ Graham, Rose, V.C.H., Gloucestershire II 101, citing Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 428.Google Scholar

²⁶¹ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 431.Google Scholar

²⁶² Clark, Cartae IV 153.Google Scholar

²⁶³ Gray, ‘Notes on the Granges of Margam,’ loc.cit.: Melis, Penhydd Waeelod, Hafod, Hafodheulog, Llanmihangel (St. Michael's), Eglwysnunyd, Le Newe Grange, Groes-wen, Grugwallt, Theodoric's Hermitage, Llanbugeilydd.Google Scholar

²⁶⁴ Ibid. 103-8.Google Scholar

²⁶⁵ Ibid. 166; Clark, Cartae I 309-10 no. 277 (cited in error as no. 327 by Gray).Google Scholar

²⁶⁶ Clark, Cartae IV no. 1239.Google Scholar

²⁶⁷ Birch, History of Margam 348; Clark, Cartae II 210-13 no. 386; Clark, ‘Contrib. towards a Cart. of Margam,’ loc. cit. 377-80. This lease of 1470 was regarded by Birch, somewhat without justification it seems to me (in view of the accidental nature of the evidence), as the beginning of wide-scale leasing of granges at Margam: ‘The year 1470 introduces to our observation a new phase of the management of the Conventual revenues. The Abbey seems to have determined to abandon the farming of its granges, preferring to lease them at a fixed rental to responsible persons’ (History of Margam 348). Gray seems to have adopted this view (op. cit. 93).Google Scholar

²⁶⁸ Gray, , op. cit. 16; Clark, Cartae IV 398-99 no. 1287.Google Scholar

²⁶⁹ Clark, , Cartae IV 429-30.Google Scholar

²⁷⁰ Gray, , op. cit. 90.Google Scholar

²⁷¹ Clark, , Cartae IV 436-37 no. 1317.Google Scholar

²⁷² Ibid. IV 443-44 no. 1322. The grange of Grugwallt, near the abbey, may also have been rented at this time, since there was a chapel at Cryke, Grugwallt, in the woods some two hundred yards directly from the abbey and overlooking the abbey church and building. Gray surmised that the chapel, which could have been served by a priest from the abbey, was built for the tenants toward the end of the fifteenth century (Gray, op. cit. 93).Google Scholar

²⁷³ Francis, Original Charters of Neath (no pagination); see also Birch, , History of Neath Abbey 143-44: ‘Leases of this nature were not unusual at the last throes of the monastic life of England. The convents felt the imminent storm of ruin hanging over their heads, and were only too glad to convert their lands into substantial rent, which gave them less trouble to collect than the land took the reduced number of monks to cultivate’ (p. 144).Google Scholar

²⁷⁴ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 272.Google Scholar

²⁷⁵ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 577 no. 23; Purvis, ‘Selection of Monastic Rentals,’ loc. cit. (n. 9 supra) 39-40. The granges listed in the Ministers’ Accounts, 30 Henry VIII, numbered ten.Google Scholar

²⁷⁶ Caldon and Oncott were listed as granges in the Ministers’ Accounts (Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 663 no. 5) even though they appear from the Valor listing to have been broken up. Caldon grange was acquired by Croxden in the late thirteenth century from Buildwas abbey in Shropshire in an exchange whereby Croxden gave Buildwas the whole vill of Edeweney in Shropshire (ibid. V 357 no. 4, 360 no. 23).Google Scholar

²⁷⁷ Savine, A., English Monasteries on the Eve of the Dissolution (Oxford Studies in Social and Legal History 1 no. 1, Oxford 1909) 140, 147. Thus the general ratio of demesne income to gross temporal income was about 1: 12.Google Scholar

²⁷⁸ Dugdale, Mon. Ang. V 459 no. 4. In 26 Henry VIII there were only three monks and the gross revenue was £28 17s. 4d. (ibid. V 457).Google Scholar

²⁷⁹ Ibid. V 405-6. There is similar information concerning Tetisworthe and Sydenham (ibid. V 406).Google Scholar

²⁸⁰ Salter, H. E., V.C.H., Oxford II (1907) 85 n. 13.Google Scholar

²⁸¹ Savine, op. cit. 153.Google Scholar

²⁸² EHR 51.198.Google Scholar

²⁸³ Gasquet, F. A., Henry VIII and the English Monasteries (2 vols. London 1888-89) II 498: ‘In course of time this system [of Cistercian fratres conversi] was abandoned in England; for instance, at Meaux Abbey the conversi died out towards the end of the fourteenth century.’ One might infer that there were none at all after this time, as some have; but Gasquet meant only that there were no longer large numbers of conversi after the fourteenth century, for he well knew that there were a few lay brothers and even lay sisters here and there at the suppression.Google Scholar

²⁸⁴ John Hope, W. H. St., ‘Fountains Abbey,’ Yorkshire Archaeological Journal 15 (1900) 373: ‘After the middle of the fourteenth century the conversi in this country seem as a class to have died out and to have been replaced by hired servants and labourers; probably because the gradual spread of education and other causes had extinguished the class from which they had been formerly drawn.’Google Scholar

²⁸⁵ ‘Notes on the Granges of Margam,’ loc. cit. 164, 173, citing Gasquet.Google Scholar

²⁸⁶ Essays upon the History of Meaux 59: ‘Indeed after the plague (1348) when all the lay-brothers perished, the order [of conversi] was not again revived…’Google Scholar

²⁸⁷ Memorials of Fountains III xiii: ‘For some time before the middle of the fifteenth century, the Cistercians had done away with their original institution of conversi or lay brethren, who were occupied in servile labours, and the monks employed, instead of them, a large staff of paid servants.’Google Scholar

²⁸⁸ Coucher Book of Furness II pt. 3.xii: ‘…they [conversi] ceased in Cistercian houses after the Black Death of 1348.’Google Scholar

²⁸⁹ Hamilton Thompson, A., The English Clergy and Their Organization in the Later Middle Ages: The Ford Lectures for 1933 (Oxford 1947) 163, expressing his agreement with Hope's view.Google Scholar

²⁹⁰ Chron. de Melsa III 229: ‘… conversi omnes de monasterio defecuerunt; pro quorum numero monachos supplevit…’ The rental of the abbey for 1396, under the head of the tannery, refers to boots and shoes supplied to conversi claustrales and the grangiarii (possibly meaning conversi of the granges); ibid. III xliii. See also ibid. III 190-91 n. 7, for reference to a lay brother who accompanied a monk to Rome and had to return to England for the original deeds of appropriation in connection with suits involving the churches of Easington and Kayingham during the same abbacy.Google Scholar

²⁹¹ Even though data are also available in many instances concerning the number of monks in certain abbeys in various years, such information is not listed below unless the number of conversi at the same dates is also known. When the number of monks is listed for a given year and no number of conversi is given, it is to be assumed that there were none at that time. I am especially indebted to the Rev. Joseph McNulty, F.R. Hist. S., of St. Peter's, Woolston, Warrington, Lancs., for providing me with statistics on the number of monks and lay brothers in the religious houses of the province of York (especially the Cistercian abbeys of Sallay, Rievaulx, Meaux, Jervaulx, Furness, Calder, Kirkstall, Byland, Roche, and Fountains), taken from the poll tax returns for 4 Rich. II, 1380-81 (Public Record Office, E 179, 63/12). Some of these figures he has also stated in several articles: Trans. of the Lancs. and Cheshire Antiquarian Society 54 (1939) 205–6, 207-8; 57 (1943-44) 165 n. 1. I am indebted as we 1 to Professor Josiah Cox Russell for his data on the same Cistercian abbeys (except Calder) and also his data from the returns for 1377 and 1381 on the following abbeys: Revesby, Louth Park, Swineshead, Vaudey, Garendon, St. Mary Graces, and Bordesley (the P.R.O. document being cited in the list). I am also thankful to Mr. Neville, R. Hadcock and Dom David Knowles for their having made available to me before publication various Cistercian statistics, intended for their Medieval Religious Houses, England and Wales (London 1953); in turn, they were able to make use of some of the data in my tabulation.Google Scholar

²⁹² See Cranage, D. H. S., The Home of the Monk, An Account of English Monastic Life and Buildings in the Middle Ages (3rd ed. Cambridge 1934) 33, 74, 110; Coulton, G. G., Five Centuries of Religion I (Cambridge 1929) 558 (app. 30). Stephan, Buckfast Abbey 34: ‘The abbey [founded in 1136] does not seem ever to have been destined to accomodate more than fifty choir-monks, but to these must be added numerous lay-brothers, twice or three times as many as the choir monks.’ Fowler, Hayles and Beaulieu 17: ‘There is no record of their number [of conversi] at either Hayles or Beaulieu, but the extent of the buildings at Beaulieu which they occupied suggests that there it was considerable.’ At Meaux the refectory of the lay brothers was commenced in 1182-97 and finished in 1197-1210; the dormitory was completed under the fifth abbot (1210-20); and the stall of the conversi was put up at the west end of the church and their infirmary completed under the ninth abbot (1249-69) (Chron. de Melsa I 217, 326, 380; II 119).Google Scholar

²⁹³ Russell, J. C. estimates that there were about 1475 monks in 1250-1300, 1656 in 1300-46, 824 in 1377-81, 865 in 1530-36, and 1005 in 1537-40; ‘The Clerical Population of Medieval England,’ Traditio 2 (1944) 194–96. Moorman, J. R. H. estimates that there were 3256 monks in 1300, which is twice that given by Russell; Church Life in England in the Thirteenth Century (Cambridge 1946, reprint of 1945 ed.) 411, 405-6. Hadcock gives 1746 to 2112 monks in the years 1154-1216, 2104 to 1954 in the years 1216-1350, 893 to 1078 in the years 1350-1422, 1279 to 1311 in the years 1422-1500, 1314 to 1230 in the years 1500-34, and 1219 to 978 in the years 1534-40 (Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses 360). Hadcock also estimates that there were some 3200 Cistercian lay brothers in the twelfth to thirteenth centuries (ibid. 360 n. 1). The statistical basis for the latter estimate is not explained.Google Scholar

²⁹⁴ See above, p. 417.Google Scholar

²⁹⁵ Addy, , ‘Roche Abbey Charters,’ loc. cit. 244-45 no. 13. Francis, cardinal-priest of St. Mark, wrote that he had heard complaints about various irregularities committed by the monks and conversi of Roche, such as laying violent hands on their own brethren and others, carrying arms, playing dice, frequenting taverns, gardens and other forbidden and improper places, and leaving off their habit, for which they had incurred excommunication.Google Scholar

²⁹⁶ On plague mortality, see Russell, J. C., British Medieval Population (Albuquerque 1948) 214–34, 260-70.Google Scholar

²⁹⁷ It is interesting to note that in the poll tax returns for the 42 religious houses in the province of York, 1380-81 (P.R.O., E 179, 63/12), the ten Cistercian houses excepted, only seven others had conversi and none of these were Benedictine. The seven were Richmond (1 conversus), Coverham (1 conversus), Cockersand (2 conversi), Premonstratensian houses; Bridlingham (1 conversus) and Newburgh (3 conversi), houses of Black Canons; and Bolton (5 conversi) and Guisborough (2 conversi), Augustinian houses. In all, the monks and canons numbered 555 and the conversi 59.Google Scholar

²⁹⁸ Clarke, Cartae IV 277-78 no. 1214; Birch, History of Margam 323.Google Scholar

²⁹⁹ Annales Furnes. 95; also, Coucher Book of Furness II 700.Google Scholar

³⁰⁰ Whitaker, History and Ant. of the Deanery of Craven (n. 16 supra) 67.Google Scholar

³⁰¹ Gasquet, Dublin Review 114.258, 275-76.Google Scholar

³⁰² Letters and Papers of Henry VIII 13, pt. 1.68 no. 199.Google Scholar

³⁰³ Ibid. 160 no. 433.Google Scholar

³⁰⁴ Eighth Report, App. II, no 1.42; Letters and Papers 13, pt. 1.201 no. 542. It may be observed that record of a number of lay brothers and lay sisters of other orders has been noted in the materials relating to the dissolution. At the Carthusian priory of Kingston Upon Hull (at the time of the suppression) there was one conversus, age 34, referred to at the end of a list of 13; at the Benedictine abbey of nuns, St Mary's, Winchester (1536), there were 13 lay sisters (in addition to 26 nuns, 5 priests, 9 women servants, 20 household officers and servants, 3 ‘Corodiers,’ and 26 children) (Gasquet, Dublin Review 114.255, 269; Letters and Papers 15.47 no. 139 gives 23 nuns and 12 lay sisters in 1539); at the Gilbertine Walton priory (1539), the prior, subprior, 7 priests, the prioress, subprioress, 11 nuns, and 8 lay sisters (Letters and Papers 14, pt. 2.242 no. 663); at the Carthusian Mount Grace priory (1539), the prior, 16 priests, 3 novices, 6 lay brothers (‘converses’) and one donatus (Letters and Papers 14, pt. 2.258-59 no. 700); at the Gilbertine priory at Chicksands, Bedfordshire, 7 canons, 17 nuns, and one lay sister (Eighth Report, App. II, no. 1.16); at the convent of Benedictine nuns, Stixwould, Lincolnshire (Jan. 1537), 18 nuns and one lay sister (Gasquet, Henry VIII II 22). See also Gasquet's reference (ibid. II 486 n.) to another lay brother, presumably Carthusian.Google Scholar

³⁰⁵ MGH, Scriptores 16.954: see Donnelly, , op. cit. 59.Google Scholar

³⁰⁶ The comment of Bond, E. A., written in 1868, concerning the gradual disappearance of conversi at Meaux during the late fourteenth century is pertinent: ‘The explanation of this great reduction and apparent suppression of the class [of conversi] I presume to be, that the lands of the monastery had become very much to be let out to farm, and the services of conversi were not called for in that direction; and that, for the offices of the house itself, it was found more convenient to employ hired servants than to support a class of half-monks who had been found not very amenable to discipline. The arrangement was economically a good one…’ Chron. de Melsa III xliii-xliv.Google Scholar