RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



church was in great part rebuilt by Archbishop 

 Thurstan (i 1 1 9-40)^ Archbishop Henry Mur- 

 dac (1147-53), who had been abbot of Foun- 

 tains and was full of zeal for the new religious 

 orders, changed the minster of St. Oswald into 

 a priory of regular canons of the Order of St. 

 Augustine with the full approval of Pope 

 Eugenius III.* He chose Humphrey, a canon 

 of the Augustinian house of Lanthony by 

 Gloucester, as prior with the consent of two of 

 the secular canons, Nicholas and Aelward. 1 

 Nicholas became a regular canon of the new 

 foundation, Aelward received a prebend at 

 Beverley, two others resigned their prebends 

 into the archbishop's hands, and he dispossessed 

 the two remaining canons of their prebends on 

 the ground that they had received them from a 

 lay hand. 4 He endowed the convent with these 

 six prebends and two fisheries on the Severn 

 near the church of his own gift, and property at 

 Cerney. As however the endowment was in- 

 sufficient, he lent them his possessions at 

 Compton for four years or until he came to 

 Gloucester, promising either to grant them 

 Compton in perpetuity or to give them an 

 equivalent. The dependence on the see of York 

 was strictly emphasized ; unlike other Augus- 

 tinian houses, the canons of St. Oswald never 

 acquired the right of free election to the office of 

 prior.* 



The monastery was at no time prosperous. 

 It was frequently visited by Archbishop Walter 

 Gray (1214-55) ; in 1231 he sent the prior and 

 several of the canons into exile because, through 

 their maladministration, the house was heavily 

 in debt to the Jews.* In 1230 they had 

 sold their lands at Culkerton to the Cistercian 

 house of Kingswood for ioo. r However in 

 1232 the archbishop allowed the canons to re- 

 turn. 8 After a visitation in 1250 he sent a 

 number of injunctions for the government and 

 administration of the house.* He insisted that 

 the prior should only transact important busi- 

 ness with his consent, or that of a deputy whom 

 he might appoint, and with the advice of the 

 wiser members of the convent. No canon or lay 



' William of Malmesbury, Gesta Pontif. Angl. (Rolli 

 Ser.) 293. 



Simeon of Durham, Opera (Rolls Ser.), ii, 328. 



1 York Archiepis. Reg. Melton, fol. 425. ' Ibid. 



Ibid. Wickwane, fol. 574, provision of Richard of 

 Bathampton to the office of prior, ' nostro prioratui 

 S. Oswald! Glouc. iam vacant! et ad provisionem scu 

 collacionem nostram ordinariam libere et plcne 

 pertinent!.' Cf. Suppression of the Monasteries (Camdcn 

 Soc.), 124. 



Ann. Man. (Rolls Ser.), i, 78. 



1 Hiit. MSS. Com. Rep. App. i, 335. Cf. Brist. 

 and Glouc. Arch. Soc. Tram, xxii, 182. 



Ann. Man. (Rolls Ser.), i, 87. 



The injunctions are entered in Tork Archiepis. 

 Reg. Giffard (Surtees Soc.), 203 ; ' ea quae in aliis 

 nostris visitationibus ipsis iniunximus renovantes, 

 supcraJJcntcs quaedam nova.' 



brother might be admitted without the bishop's 

 consent. The common seal was to be in the 

 custody of three or four canons. Accounts 

 were to be rendered at least twice a year. It 

 appears that there was some friction between the 

 canons and the lay brothers, for the archbishop 

 declared that the canons should always and 

 everywhere have dominion over the others. At 

 the same time he forbade the canons to make 

 hay or take any share in agricultural labour. He 

 ordered the prior to be with the canons in the 

 dorter and frater, and to be diligent in correcting 

 his brethren in chapter, but in all charity, not 

 reproaching them before seculars, or punishing 

 them severely without the consent of the convent. 

 It is probable that the prior neglected the ad- 

 monition, for in 1251 the archbishop deposed 

 him, and appointed the sub-prior in his stead. 10 

 At the same time he restored certain benefices 

 to the convent. In 1280 Archbishop Wick- 

 wane appointed Richard of Bathampton as prior, 

 hoping that so good and skilful a ruler would be 

 able to restore the fortunes of the priory. 11 The 

 rule of Richard of Bathampton and his successors 

 was marked by an acute conflict with the arch- 

 bishop of Canterbury and the bishop of Worcester. 

 In 1280 Bishop Giffard promulgated a sentence 

 of excommunication against the prior for con- 

 tempt in not appearing at the citation of Arch- 

 bishop Peckham." The prior relied on papal 

 support. By apostolic authority he forbade the 

 bishop under grave penalties to execute the 

 mandate of the archbishop of Canterbury, his 

 official, or the dean of Arches, or the mandate of 

 the precentor or the sub-prior of St. Bartholomew, 

 Smithfield, against himself, the abbot of Winch- 

 combe or others adhering to them. 1 * On 

 23 March 1283 Archbishop Peckham charged 

 Bishop Giffard to promulgate his sentence of 

 excommunication against the prior and six 

 canons. 14 Edward I intervened and bade the 

 archbishop revoke his sentence. 1 ' The arch- 

 bishop replied that the king had been deceived ; 

 although royal free chapels were exempt from 

 episcopal visitation, when they were alienated 

 from the king's hands and given to others 

 they returned to their first nature of subjection 

 to the prelates and lost their exemption. He 

 had excommunicated the prior and senior canons, 

 because they did not receive him at his visitation. 

 ' We do not wish,' he wrote, ' saving your 

 reverence, to revoke the aforesaid sentence except 

 by form of law.' 1 ' In 1287 Peckham sent 

 another mandate to Giffard to promulgate the 



" Ann. Mon. (Rolls Ser.), i, 146. 



11 York Archiepis. Reg. Wickwane, fol. 574. 



" Wore. Epis. Reg. Giffard (Wore. Hist. Soc.), 122. 



"Ibid. 154. In consequence, in 1282 Giffard 

 forbade the dean of Pershore to execute his mandate. 



14 Reg. Epis. Peckham (Rolls Ser.), ii, 527 ; If ore. 

 Epis. Reg. Giffard (Wore. Hist. Soc.), 192. 



" Reg. Epis. Peckham (Rolls. Ser.), ii, 547. 



"Ibid. 



