RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



On the Saturday before the third Sunday in 

 Lent, 1276, the priory was visited by the prior 

 of Wenlock and the equerry of the abbot of 

 Cluni. The community then numbered thirty- 

 two, and the visitors reported that their mode of 

 life was conducted with propriety and regularity. 

 The same general injunctions that were issued 

 throughout the visitation were served on the 

 prior relative to the use of the saddle-crupper, 

 riding leggings, the eating of meat, reading in 

 the farmery, and remaining in the convent after 

 compline. The debts of the house amounted to 

 the serious sum of ;^504. In 1279 there was a 

 visitation by the priors of Mont Didier (France) 

 and Lenton. They arrived at Castle Acre on 

 8 September. They reported that the brethren 

 numbered thirty-five, and that they conducted 

 themselves well, and carried on the divine offices 

 and all ecclesiastical rites in a proper manner. 

 The liabilities of the house were 1,700 marks, 

 though the debt was only 600 marks when the 

 prior was first appointed. The house had also 

 become responsible for the debt of 200 marks of 

 Miles, the present abbot of V6zelay (France), at 

 the time when he was prior of Lewes.' The 

 prior was too extravagant [nimis sumptuosus), but 

 would willingly resign if another superior could 

 be found. ^ 



In January, 1344, Clement VI received a peti- 

 tion from John de Warenne, earl of Surrey, stating 

 that the dispensation on account of illegitimacy, 

 granted by John XXII and renewed by Gauce- 

 lin, bishop of Albano, under order of Benedict 

 XII, to his brother William, prior first of Hoxton 

 and then of Castle Acre, formerly monk of Lewes, 

 was of no avail, because it was given for a non- 

 conventual priory — Hoxton being non-conven- 

 tual but Castle Acre conventual — praying that, 

 notwithstanding William's illegitimacy, he may 

 retain the priory of Castle Acre. In the event 

 Prior William was rehabilitated and dispensed, 

 and the fruits received were remitted.' It would 

 ■seem that William not long afterwards resigned 

 •or was degraded from the office of prior, as an 

 order was issued in 1349 for the arrest of 

 William de Waren and Robert de Neketon, 

 monksof Castle Acre, who had spurned the habit 

 of their order and were vagabond, and their 

 ■delivery to William Picot their prior.* 



An undated visitation among the Cluni muni- 

 ments, but probably of the year 1 390, gives the 

 number of the monks as twenty-six, and states 

 that there were seven daily celebrations written 

 down on the table, three of which were with 

 music and four plain. Twenty-six is named as 



' Milo de Columbiers was prior of Lewes from 

 1263 to 1274; at the latter date he resigned on 

 teing appointed abbot of Vezelay — Robert de Hake- 

 beche was at this time prior of Castle Acre. 



' Duckett, CAart. and Rec. of Cluni, ii, 127, 142. 



' Cal. Papal Pet. i, 30. 



* Pat. 22 Edw. Ill, pt. iii, m. 22. 



the full complement of monks, though it is 

 stated that formerly the number was not limited 

 and was sometimes upwards of thirty.' 



A table of all the affiliated foundations of the 

 abbey of Cluni throughout Christendom, drawn 

 up about the year 1500, gives the number of the 

 monks then at Castle Acre as twenty-six.^ 



The indulgence of the Portiuncula was granted 

 in August, 1 40 1, by Boniface IX to penitents, 

 who on the next Passion Sunday and on the 

 feast of St. James should visit the Cluniac church 

 of Castle Acre and give alms for the repair of tiie 

 church, wherein are divers relics of saints, and to 

 the which a great number of people resort. The 

 prior, sub-prior, and ten other priests chosen by 

 them, were authorized to hear confessions on 

 those two feasts, and on the two days immedi- 

 ately preceding them.'' 



A singular question of conscience arose in 

 1404 as to the observance of an oath taken by 

 Simon Sutton, prior of Castle Acre. On his ob- 

 taining the priory, the Earl of Arundel, asserting 

 himself to be patron, exacted from him an oath 

 not to alienate its woods or possessions, nor to 

 manumit his serfs without licence of the earl or 

 his successors. Subsequently he regretted taking 

 this oath lest it should prejudice the priory rights, 

 and appealed to the pope as to its lawfulness. 

 Innocent VII, after passing a salutary penance 

 on Simon for his incautious oath, decided that the 

 oath was void, as laymen had no such power 

 over persons and things ecclesiastical.* 



The Valor of 1535 gives the clear annual 

 value at ;^3o6 i is. 4^^/. The offerings at the 

 arm of St. Philip, their most important relic, 

 averaged at that time loj. a year. 



Thomas Mailing, who had been admitted to 

 office in June, 15 1 9, was prior. On 27 Janu- 

 ary, 1536, when he wrote a note to Cromwell, 

 of a character only too frequent during that un- 

 happy period, the prior stated that he was send- 

 ing four marks by the bearer to Cromwell ' for 

 a poor token,' and a patent of four marks a year 

 to him for life out of the monastic revenues. 

 He also said that the bearer was bringing the 

 evidences of his poor house to Cromwell accord- 

 ing to his injunctions, but begged him to dispense 

 with or qualify some of his orders.' 



In February the priory was visited by the inqui- 

 sitors, Legh and Ap Rice, who claimed that seven 

 of the monks had confessed to foul sins. But so 

 little credence was in truth given to these tales 

 that in the following month (March, 1536) 

 Thomas Mailing, the superior of a singularly 

 polluted house, if the royal visitors were to be 

 believed, was chosen by the bishop of Norwich 

 to be presented to the archbishop, together with 



* Ibid, ii, 210. 



* Pignot, Ordre de Cluni, ii, 566. 

 ' Cal. Pap. Reg. v, 415. 



« Ibid, vi, 78. 



' L. and P. Hen. Fill, x, 66. 



357 



