RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



in the temporal affairs of the priory, but in spite 

 of his age preferred to follow hounds rather than 

 books. The archbishop, therefore, appointed 

 John, formerly official of the bishop of Norwich, 

 and another monk to act with the prior in the 

 control of the business of the house ; he further 

 ordered that if any of the canons wanted to 

 follow the hounds they should do so on horses 

 and not on foot, and that only when the prior 

 himself was present. Those who were suspected 

 of incontinency were not to be allowed outside 

 the priory except in cases of necessity, and then 

 only when accompanied by others of good fame, 

 and if they spoke to women or went into their 

 houses they were to be severely punished ; nor 

 were women to be admitted to the priory on any 

 account, save in the case of great and noble 

 ladies accompanied by their trains who could not 

 be refused. Chess and similar games were at the 

 same time strictly forbidden, one of the canons, 

 Robert de Hunstanton, being singled out as a 

 special offender in this particular respect. Finally, 

 the archbishop ordered that his letter should be 

 copied and shown to the visitors on the occasion 

 of all future visitations, that they might see how 

 far the state of the house had improved. 



On 2 November, 1492, Archdeacon Goldweli, 

 as commissary of the bishop, visited Coxford, 

 when prior Henry, sub-prior Robert Dereham, 

 and six other canons were present. The report 

 showed that the farmery was not open for the 

 reception of infirm brethren ; that the frater 

 was too cold for sitting at meals ; that it would 

 be for the good of the house to have a grammar 

 master for the younger canons ; and that there 

 was no honest recreation provided.^ 



Bishop Nicke paid a personal visitation to the 

 priory on 12 July, 15 14. John Mathew, the 

 prior, said that mattin mass was not celebrated ; 

 that the brethren were disobedient, quarrelsome, 

 and incorrigible ; and that Canon John Berdon 

 had taken flight three or four times and was then 

 imprisoned. Sub-Prior John Nytingale said that 

 silence was not observed ; that the prior did not 

 present annual accounts ; that the frater was 

 ruinous ; and that they had no farmery. Canon 

 William Kettilston re-echoed the complaints as 

 to frater and farmery. Canon Richard Andrew 

 said that the prior only rose for the night offices 

 on the four great festivals. Five other canons 

 reported omnia bene. The consequent injunc- 

 tions provided for the presenting of an annual 

 account, for the better observance of silence, for 

 the providing of suitable food for the sick, and 

 for the obedience and religious behaviour in quire 

 of the canons.^ 



The bishop suffragan of Chalcedon visited in 

 1520. After preaching in 

 from the text, Sith ioUlciti 

 the prior and ni 



the chapter-house 

 servare unitatem^ 

 canons were severally 



' Jessopp, Norw. Fisit. (Camd. Soc), 29. 

 ' Ibid. 111-12. 



examined. Prior Mathew complained that at 

 the request of Dr. Hare they had assigned an 

 annuity of 40X. to his nephew, Nicholas Hare, 

 to act as their steward, an office which they 

 found he could not lawfully hold. John Nightin- 

 gale, sub-prior, said that there was no annual 

 return of accounts, but cetera omnia bene. The 

 eight other canons had no complaint, and spoke 

 the praises of the prior. The prior exhibited 

 an inventory of the goods of the house, and 

 was enjoined for the future to lay an annual 

 balance-sheet before the senior canons.' 



At the visitation on 8 August, 1526, Prior 

 Mathew acknowledged that he had not presented 

 any annual statement of accounts, and John 

 Nightingale, sub-prior, testified that such had 

 not been the custom of the priory for the past 

 forty years. There were only three other canons 

 at the visitation, two of them priests and one a 

 deacon ; they all said omnia bene.* 



Henry Salter was prior when the last visitation 

 of this house was held in 1532. The prior said 

 that there was no record of the possessions of 

 the house in consequence of his predecessors 

 having kept no accounts ; that he had not yet 

 been prior for a year, but that at the end of the 

 year he promised to produce a balance-sheet. 

 He further reported that Canon Robert Porter 

 had been guilty of incontinence, and had been 

 corrected by Master Rawlins, his predecessor. 

 Sub-Prior William Neville made a good report of 

 everything save as to the condition of the dorter; 

 four other canons were content to testify omnia 

 bene. The visitor enjoined that, with the con- 

 sent of the prior and convent, the house and 

 chamber of the sub-prior should be used as a 

 farmery ; that the dorter should be repaired as 

 soon as possible ; and that the year's balance 

 should be presented within a month after 

 Michaelmas.' 



John de Cokesford was prior on 17 September, 

 1534, when the prior and nine canons subscribed 

 to the king's supremacy.* In several documents 

 of I 534-6, evidently referring to the same prior, 

 the sub-prior is indifferently termed Mathew, 

 Coxford, and Adamson ; apparently John Mathew, 

 the former prior, was re-elected about I533' 



According to Legh and Ap Rice's scandalous 

 comperta of 1 536, one of the oldest canons of 

 this house, the sub-prior, William Neville, con- 

 fessed to them his incontinency.' Later in the 

 same year the county commissioners for sup- 

 pression reported that ' The Priory of Chanones 

 of Cokesforde of the order of Seynt Augustine ys 

 a hede house and hathe a Covent seale and ys of 

 the yearly value of cxx//, ix5, ix//, with xvij//, 

 vijf, xd for the demayne under ther in the occu- 

 pacione of the Prior, Religious persones iij 



'Ibid. 169. 



* Ibid. 251. ' Ibid. 313-14. 



* Rymer, FoeJera (Rcc. Com.), xiv, 501. 

 ' L. and P. Hen. Fill, iv (3), 2699. 



379 



