RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



Basedale nunnery was situated about 8 miles 

 from the parish church of Stokesley, and 

 Isabella the prioress ' obtained from the abbot 

 (Robert de Longchamp) and the monks of 

 St. Mary's, York, the patrons of Stokesley Church, 

 with consent of Gerald the parson of Stokesley, 

 the right to have a cemetery at Basedale, in 

 which the nuns, sisters and conversi who had 

 assumed their habit at Basedale might be buried, 

 but all their servants and men were to be 

 buried at Stokesley, and were to receive the 

 sacraments at the mother church. 



In the Taxatio of 1 291 Basedale was valued 

 at only ,^5 6s. 6d.,^'^ by far the least of any 

 house in Cleveland. In the Fa/or Ecclesiasticus 

 the clear annual value was only ;r20 is. 4(5?.^^ 



On 17 May 1304^^ Archbishop Corbridge 

 committed the custody of the goods of the nuns 

 of Basedale to Roger de Kelleshay, rector of 

 Crathorne. Troubles soon afterwards arose in 

 the house, which culminated in an order (dated 

 15 May 1307)'' for the deprivation of the 

 prioress (Joan de Percy) on account of her 

 dilapidation of the goods of the house, and her 

 excesses and perpetual and notorious misdeeds 

 {crimtna). The name of her successor is un- 

 known, but on 1 3 September " in the same year 

 the archbishop granted her licence to have her 

 meals in her own chamber on Sundays and the 

 third and fourth ferias in each week. Joan 

 de Percy then had left the house, taking with 

 her some of the nuns, and on 2 1 September ^' 

 the archbishop wrote to the official of York to 

 warn Joan and the others that they were 

 to return without delay, and not to go outside 

 the precincts {septa) of the monastery, but scry- 

 ing God in the cloister under the yoke of obedi- 

 ence, were in humility to take heed to the salu- 

 tary monitions of their prioress. In July in the 

 year following ^' the archbishop wrote to the 

 Prioress and convent of Sinningthwaite, send- 

 ing Joan de Percy to them, as she had been 

 guilty of disobedience at Basedale." On 

 13 October 1308 '* the archbishop wrote to the 

 prioress and convent regarding the miserable 

 state of Agnes de Thormondby, one of their 

 nuns, concerning whom he had heard that, on 

 three separate occasions, she had yielded carnis 



' Dugdale, Mon. Angl. v, 509, no. vii. As Robert 

 de Longchamp was abbot from 1 197, and as Susanna 

 was prioress about 1230 (Whitby Chartul. i, 233) the 

 date of the concession must have been c. 1 197-1230. 



^"PofeNich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 325. 



" Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 87. 



" York Archiepis. Reg. Corbridge, fol. 29. 



"Ibid. Greenfield, i, fol. 88. 



» Ibid. fol. 883. " Ibid. " Ibid, fol, 90. 



"A commission had been issued on 3 Feb. 1308 

 for the visitation of Basedale and other houses, and it 

 was at this visitation, of which no other particulars 

 are given, that Joan de Percy's disobedience was re- 

 vealed (ibid. fol. 95^). 



"Ibid. fol. 93. 



decepta blandiciisy and left her order. They were 

 to take her back, as she returned humbly and 

 in a contrite spirit, and to impose on her the 

 salutary penance of their rule. 



On Wednesday after the feast of St. Michael 

 1315,^' Archbishop Greenfield held a visitation 

 of Basedale, when he issued a scries of injunc- 

 tions which are practically the same as others 

 directed at the same time to Handale, the two 

 being almost word for word the same, from 

 which it may be inferred that they throw little 

 or no light on the internal affairs of either house, 

 being couched very much in what, in legal 

 language, is known as ' common form.' From 

 the general character of the injunctions it may 

 be assumed that the little nunnery had resumed 

 its normal state of peace, and that nothing was 

 then seriously amiss. 



Troubles, however, again arose, and on 

 1 8 March 1 343 ^^ Archbishop Zouch issued a 

 commission to inquire into the truth of the 

 articles urged against Katherine Moubray, the 

 prioress, and if her demerits exacted it, to depose 

 her, unless she resigned. It does not appear 

 what took place, but only two years later the 

 archbishop appointed other commissioners, on 

 3 May 1345,^^ to inquire into abuses there, and 

 if necessary depose the prioress, and see to the 

 election of a successor. The two commissions 

 following one another so rapidly point to any- 

 thing but a happy state of aflfairs. 



In June 1359^^ the prioress desired to resign 

 owing to her age and debility, and on 9 June 

 1378 ^' Archbishop Alexander Nevill ordered 

 John, Prior of Guisborough, to receive the 

 resignation of Alice Page, probably the prioress 

 elected in 1359, who from infirmity of age and 

 weakness of body could no longer govern the 

 house. 



On 13 August 1524^ Joan Fletcher, a 

 nun of Rosedale, was confirmed as Prioress of 

 Basedale. Her record in her office of prioress is 

 a bad one, and from fear of deposition she 

 resigned and also cast aside her habit and left the 

 house. There are two letters respecting her, 

 written by Archbishop Lee on i September 1 5 34,^* 

 one addressed to the Prioress and convent of 

 Rosedale, to which after her apostasy she had 

 been sent back to do penance, and the other 

 addressed to Basedale. She had set a bad ex- 

 ample at Rosedale, and shown no sign of true 

 repentance, so the archbishop transferred her to 

 Basedale, which she had once ruled as prioress, 

 that where she had not been ashamed to sin, 

 there she might lament her sins. He exhorted 

 the nuns of Basedale to receive her with affec- 

 tion, but not to permit her to go outside the 



" Ibid, ii, fol. 108. " Ibid. Zouch, fol. 154. 



" Ibid. fol. 157. " Ibid. Thoresby, fol. 1 77. 



"Ibid. A. Nevill, fol. 41. 



" Ibid. Wolsey, fol. 77. 



''• Torks. Jrch. journ. xvi, 432. 



159 



