RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



and it is likely that he held the office of treasurer. 



At the visitation he was accused of being a 



drunkard, to the damage of the house and the 



scandal of many. He was negligent and remiss 



in spiritual and temporal matters, being himself 



a man of evil life. Discipline was relaxed, and 



he was charged with having spent a great part of 



the substance of the house on his kinsfolk ; with 



alienating the silver vessels and ornaments of the 



church ; with pledging the credit of the house 



for debts of other persons. The bishop was told 



that owing to his conduct the monastery was so 



seriously embarrassed that the most discreet abbot 



would find difficulty in redeeming its fortunes. 



In 1298 Giffard restored the church of Ampney 



St. Mary to the monastery on the ground that it 



had been appropriated since the foundation of the 



house, and had been lost through the nepotism of a 



former abbot. 1 When the prior of Worcester 



attempted to visit the abbey in 1302, during 



the voidance of the see after the death of Giffard, 



he was refused admittance because the house had 



already been visited twice within two years. 1 



During the rule of Abbot Henry de Hamptonet 



there was a crisis in the relations of the convent 



with the town. 1 In 1301 Edward I issued a 



commission of oyer and terminer to William de 



Bereford and Henry Spigurnel on the complaint 



of the poor men of Cirencester that the abbot, 



two canons, and others, had extorted from them, 



for the first time, great sums of money by undue 



distraints ; had entered their houses, assaulted 



and imprisoned some of them ; consumed the 



goods of some, and carried away the goods of 



others ; taken some of their beasts and impounded 



others, detaining them until a great part died of 



hunger, and driving some to places unknown. 4 



A number of tenants attempted to avoid the 



obligation of taking their corn to be ground at 



the abbot's mills by using handmills in their 



houses. At different times between 1300 and 



1305, the abbot's bailiff and others broke into 



the houses of several men of Cirencester and 



seized their mill-stones ; some they broke, others 



they carried off to the monastery.* When the 



jurors presented their complaint before the 



justices of Traylbaston at Gloucester in 1305, 



they replied that it was a question of tenure. 



The town was at the abbot's mercy, and it was 



agreed that twenty men of Cirencester should 



execute a deed on behalf of themselves and the 



whole community, stating that they had made 



a false complaint, and binding themselves to pay 



100 marks to the abbot.* 



In 1306 the convent secured the important 

 privilege of retaining the custody of the property 



Wore. Efls. Reg. Giffard (Wore. Hist. Soc.), 508. 

 Ann. Mm. (Rolls Ser.), iv, 551 ; Wore. Reg. SeJe. 

 Vac. (Wore. Hist. Soc.), 68. 



Briit. and Glouc. Arch. Sot. Trans, ix, 311-15. 



Cal. of Pat. 24 Edw. I, m. 28 d. 



Brut, and Ghuc. Arch. Soc. Tram, ix, 314, 315. 



Ibid. 



Si 



of the house during the voidance on the death 

 of an abbot. For the right of excluding the 

 escheators they covenanted to pay the king ^IOO 

 for a voidance of three months or less. 7 In the 

 following year the abbot died. Forty canons were 

 present at the election of Hamptonet's successor, 

 Adam de Brokenborough.* It took place during 

 a voidance of the see of Worcester, and probably 

 owing to some informality in the proceedings the 

 prior of Worcester declared the election invalid, 

 but understanding that Adam de Brokenborough 

 was ' a discreet man, esteemed for his learning 

 and virtuous habits and actions . . . and cir- 

 cumspect in spiritual and temporal matters,' he 

 collated him to the office of abbot.* The penalty 

 for disregard of the statute of mortmain was 

 heavy, and in 1313 the abbot and convent were 

 compelled to pay a fine of ^200 for the royal 

 pardon because they had received a number of 

 parcels of lands, tenements, and shops in Ciren- 

 cester without the late king's leave to acquire 

 them in mortmain. 10 In 1314 they paid another 

 fine of 20 for obtaining the appropriation of 

 Ampney St. Mary from Bishop Giffard without 

 licence, 11 and ^5 for acquiring lands in Minety in 

 mortmain in the reign of Edward I. 11 Heavy 

 law costs were incurred in defending the abbot's 

 rights to take tallage from his tenants. In 1312 

 Master Nicholas de Stratton impleaded the abbot 

 for an illegal tallage, and although according to 

 the townsmen of Cirencester he was afterwards 

 beaten and slain by the abbot's servants, the suit 

 dragged on until 1321, when Edward II granted 

 a charter confirming the abbot's right. 11 



In 1325 during the rule of Richard of Charlton 

 (1320-35), disquieting rumours of evil-living 

 among the canons reached Cobham, bishop of 

 Worcester. 14 Although he had visited the monas- 

 tery nothing sinister had come to his knowledge. 

 Nevertheless, on account of popular reports, 

 which may, indeed, have been spread by the 

 resentful townsmen, the bishop bade the abbot 

 discover the truth of the matter ; if any of the 

 canons were found guilty and remained contu- 

 macious their names were to be sent to him. 

 The bishop's aid was not invoked. 



About 1342 the strife with the town broke 

 out again. 1 ' Owing to the development of the 

 wool-trade many of the men of Cirencester were 

 very prosperous, and keenly resented their posi- 

 tion as the abbot's tenants. They preferred a 

 bill of complaint into chancery charging the 

 abbot, William Hereward, and his predecessors 

 with encroachments on the king's rights and 



* Cal. of Pat. 35 Edw. I, m. 43. 

 *Wtrt. Reg. Seat Vac. (Wore. Hist. Soc.), 101. 

 Ibid. 102. 



u Ca/. of Pat. 7 Edw. II, pt. i, m. 17. 

 11 Ibid. pt. ii, m. 15. "Ibid. m. 4. 



" Brut, and Glouc. Arch. Soc. Trans, ix, 3 1 7, cf. , 

 116. 



14 Wore. Epis. Reg. Cobham, fol. 112. 

 "Brut, and Clout. Arch. Soc. Trans, ix, 321-8. 



II 



