RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



own pleasure, without the consent of the seniors 

 (against the custom of religion) ; that utensils 

 pertaining to the infirmary ought to be restored 

 to their proper use ; that the prior should assign 

 to each canon a certain chamber, but that he 

 takes them away for a light breach of discipline ; 

 that many gentlefolk, particularly relatives of the 

 prior, frequent the house to its great detriment ; 

 that there is no schoolmaster for the teaching 

 of grammar ; and that the prior does not exhibit 

 any statement of account, nor has he any 

 cellarer or other official who knows the state of 

 the house and could act in case of his sickness. 

 The bishop stated, before leaving, that he did not 

 find much worthy of reformation, and therefore 

 dissolved the visitation, promising to forward 

 certain injunctions. 1 



Bishop Nykke visited in July, 1514. Prior 

 Augustine Rivers said that there was an old debt 

 of j7O, as well as one incurred by himself and 

 due to the bishop of j2O. He said that all 

 things were laudable so far as the income of the 

 house permitted ; but that the buildings and 

 manor houses were out of repair. William 

 Woodbridge, the sub-prior, said that three masses 

 were said daily, and that both day and night 

 hours were duly observed ; also that the brethren 

 were obedient and continent, and that all other 

 things were well. John Thetford, having a 

 bachelor's degree, said that he knew but little of 

 the state of the house as he was absent at the 

 university, but he knew nothing but what was 

 creditable of his brethren. He considered that 

 Thomas Orford was a good grammarian and 

 given to letters, and his friends wished him to go 

 to the university at their expense. Richard 

 Wilton, cellarer, spoke warmly of the prior's 

 industry, both in the spiritual and temporal 

 interests of the house so far as income would 

 permit, but that he was overburdened with the 

 dilapidations of the buildings, granges, and manor 

 houses. Seven of the canons simply testified 

 omnia bene. John Norwich said that the ser- 

 vice books were sadly worn. James Hillington 

 considered that the sub-prior and some of the 

 older canons were negligent in attending divine 

 offices. Thomas Sudbury complained of the 

 language of Reginald Westerfield towards the 

 younger canons ; in this he was supported by 

 another canon who had heard Westerfield call 

 the juniors ' horesons.' 



The bishop, in his consequent injunctions, 

 cautioned Westerfield against the use of oppro- 

 brious terms, and ordered the prior to permit both 

 Thetford and Orford to go to the university. 2 



The priory was visited in July, 1520, by the 

 suffragan Bishop of Chalcedon and three other 

 commissaries of the diocesan. Prior Rivers was 

 able to say that the debt was reduced to 40*. 



1 Bodl. Tanner MSS. 53-5 (ed. Dr. Jessopp for 

 Camd. Soc. in 1884). 

 'Ibid. 131-3. 



William Woodbridge, the sub-prior, said that 

 everything was well and industriously observed, 

 and one other canon was equally content. The 

 rest had various complaints, but of no very 

 serious character. Their nature can be gathered 

 from the subsequent injunctions, which ordered 

 that a suitable place should be at once provided 

 for the infirm ; that a sufficiency of food should 

 be daily provided in the refectory ; that the quire 

 books should be properly repaired before Christ- 

 mas ; that an inventory should be exhibited at 

 the next Michaelmas synod ; and that the bre- 

 thren should observe silence in the refectory, 

 dormitory, and cloister. 3 



At the visitation of 1526 the same prior and 

 sub-prior again gave good testimony and knew of 

 nothing worthy of reform. Five of the fourteen 

 other canons were equally satisfied. The only 

 complaint was that they had no scholar at the 

 university. John Debenham, who suffered 

 severely from gout {podagra cruciatus], sought to 

 be excused from matins during the winter. 

 Thomas Orford (vexatus morbo galkrum) exhibited 

 a dispensation to retire from the religious life 

 granted him by the Lord Cardinal (Wolsey). 

 The sacrist stated that the main sewer could not 

 be flooded. The sub-sacrist complained that the 

 prior scolded the brethren before laymen, and 

 that the roof of the church admitted rain. The 

 third prior said that the seniors confessed to 

 whom they liked, that the quire books were 

 insufficient, that due food for the infirm was not 

 provided, that they had no porter, and that the 

 roof of the church was defective. These and 

 other minor irregularities were duly dealt with 

 in the injunctions. 4 



The last visitation of Butley priory before the 

 dissolution was held on 21 June, 1532, by Bishop 

 Nykke, and entered at great length in his visita- 

 tion register. The sub-prior gave a good report 

 and spoke of the wise administrative powers of 

 the prior (paliticus ft circumspectus). The precentor 

 and sacrist said that the prior kept everything 

 pertaining to the different offices of the house in 

 his own hands, and a like complaint was made 

 by others. The third prior reported that neither 

 doctor nor surgeon were provided for the infirm; 

 that the quire books had not been repaired ; 

 that junior candidates seeking holy orders were 

 sent on foot, instead of on horseback ; that the 

 prior made no annual account in spite of the 

 bishop's injunctions ; that the presbytery of the 

 church and both the porches were out of repair ; 

 and that the food was too sparse, with a too- 

 great frequency of salt fish. The refectorian 

 complained that the refectory was too cold in the 

 winter, from which cause the brethren suffered 

 from the gout and severe colds (alias gelldas in- 

 firmitates) ; that there was not a sufficiency of 

 food ; that certain pewter cups for the use of the 

 infirm had been removed by the sub-prior ; and 



Ibid. 177-9. 



97 



4 Ibid. 216-20. 

 '3 



