We may also consider the Palmers Gild which was founded in 1284. This gild supported a “warden, 7 priestes, 4 singyng men, twoo deacons, syx Queristers, ... 32 pore Almes people†as well as a schoolmaster to teach Latin.[434]
As additional instances of schools which were established through the agency of gilds we may enumerate the school at Maldon which is supposed to have been founded by theFraternity of the Assumption of the Virgin,[435]and the school at Raleigh, which was founded by the Trinity Gild in 1388-9.[436]The chantry certificate relating to this gild states that “lands were put in feoffement by diverse and sundry persons to ffinde a prieste ... to teach a fre schole their to instruct youth. Which seide town of Raleigh is a very greate and populous towne.â€[437]These instances readily demonstrate the democratic appreciation of education, and that among the purposes for which people joined themselves together in voluntary association was the provision of facilities for education.
We pass to an important topic when we consider the work of the gilds-merchant and the craft gilds. If we can trace any educational activities on the part of these associations then we can trace the origin of the interest taken by the civic communities and by organised labour respectively in education.
Though it is an error to conceive of the gild-merchant as identical with the municipal authority yet as Gross points out the distinction between them was barely perceptible. Now, if we can show that the gilds-merchant in some cases supported schools, then we have shown the interest of the civic community (as apart from the work of the Church) in educational matters. The only specific case of a gild-merchant taking an interest in education which we have been able to find is that of the gild-merchant of York. The chantry certificate of the cityof York states that “the governour and kepers of the mysterye of merchauntes of the cytie of York,†co-operated in the foundation of a hospital which had as one of its objects the maintenance of “two poore scolers.â€[438]
Our difficulty in dealing with this topic arises from the fact that the “founder†of schools mentioned in the available documents is so very frequently not the real founder. It is for this reason that Edward VI., Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, and others have been regarded as the founders of schools which cannot in any real sense be attributed to them. In the case of gilds, we find the names of certain persons mentioned as the founders of various charitable trusts without a distinct statement of the fact that they were acting simply as representatives of an association.
We are, therefore, driven to consider the full objects of the charitable trust under discussion. If the objects mentioned are mainly religious or eleemosynary, then it is probable that the trust created was ecclesiastical in its origin, but if these characteristics are not definitely present, or if the purposes specified by the trust include duties which should form a part of the duty of the municipality, then we consider that the gild should be classed under the municipal gilds.
With this object in view, we may examine the chantry certificate for the town of Wisbech, one of the fullest and most complete of the chantry certificates and one which would have well served as a model to others who had the duty of drawing up these returns. In answer to the question of the founder of the gild, the certificate states the gild was founded in the reign of Richard II. by certain clerks whose names are specified “with other mo.†This last phrase is significant as it supports the inference that the gild was formed by the citizens of the town, but that the clergy, as the natural leaders of the community, would append their names first to the document.
The objects of the gild, which are specified in this return may be briefly summarised—
(1) The maintenance of Divine service.(2) Prayer for the souls of the faithful departed.(3) Maintenance of a Grammar School.(4) Relief of the Poor.(5) Maintenance of almshouses.(6) Repair of the church.(7) Maintenance of dykes “for the sauftie bothe of the sayd towne and 14 other towns.â€[439]
(1) The maintenance of Divine service.
(2) Prayer for the souls of the faithful departed.
(3) Maintenance of a Grammar School.
(4) Relief of the Poor.
(5) Maintenance of almshouses.
(6) Repair of the church.
(7) Maintenance of dykes “for the sauftie bothe of the sayd towne and 14 other towns.â€[439]
Here we have an effective enumeration of the duties of a municipal authority, and when the date of the founding of the gild and the absence of any legislation which compelled the carrying out of such tasks are considered, then the duties specified point to a high degree of social responsibility having been attained at Wisbech at this date. We may, therefore, conclude that the gild at Wisbech was not simply a religious association for purely spiritual purposes, but was an association of the civil community for municipal purposes. That these purposes included certain religious functions is not a matter of surprise. Religion in the Middle Ages was more closely interwoven with the life of the people than it is to-day.
The gild existing at Stratford-on-Avon seems also to have been a citizen gild. Its origin can be traced to a date earlier than 1295. In the return made to the sheriff’s proclamation in 1389, it was stated that the gild was begun at a time beyond the memory of man. The affairs of the gild were administered by two wardens who were elected by the members. The main objects of the gild seem to have been the maintenance of priests to celebrate divine service and the keeping of a grammar school.[440]
The chantry certificate of the city of Worcester further supports the contention that the municipal authority provided a school. The certificate referred to was signed by the master of the gild, two bailiffs of the city, an alderman, a citizen, and two stewards of the gild. It is notable that not a single ecclesiastic signs the return. The school,moreover, was kept in the Gild Hall of the city, and was apparently a successful one, as there were over 100 scholars who attended it. This return, coupled with the fact that Worcester was a cathedral city, raises several points of interest which it is hoped that future research will elucidate. From whom was the necessary authority to establish the school derived? Was the school the outcome of a dispute between the civic and the ecclesiastical authorities, as was the school at Exeter in the seventeenth century?Prima facie, facts certainly point in that direction.[441]
We have quoted the case of these three gilds to support the contention that it had begun to be realised that it was the duty of the municipal authorities to make provision for education. A full investigation into this subject can only gradually be made, as the various municipal documents are examined with this object in view. We may, however, note here that the “Gilds of Holy Trinity and St. George†in Warwick were responsible for the continuance of Warwick School,[442]that the burgesses of Coventry seem to have maintained a school,[443]that a grammar school at Ipswich was founded by the municipality,[444]that the civic authorities at Bridgenorth were in charge of the schools,[445]and that the school at Plymouth was founded by the corporation.[446]
The work of the craft gilds for education still remains to be considered. We find that at Shrewsbury, the Drapers’ Gild, the Mercers’ Gild, the Shermen Gild, the Shoemakers’ Gild, the Tailors’ Gild, and the Weavers’ Gild, each supported a chantry priest at either the church of St. Mary, or St. Chad, or St. Julian. By analogy with other cases, we assume that these chantry priests acted as schoolmasters to the children of the members of the craft gilds.[447]
A new departure was instituted when a successful member of a craft gild bequeathed money to it for the purpose of endowing a school at a specified place. Thus, in1443, John Abbot made the Mercers’ Craft the trustees of a school to be founded at Farthinghoe in Northamptonshire.[448]A school at Lancaster was founded in 1469 by John Gardyner, burgess and probably miller, of Lancaster.[449]In 1487, Sir Edmund Shaw or Sha “cytezen goldsmyth and alderman and late mayer of the citee of London†devised money to the Goldsmiths’ Company for the purpose of establishing and maintaining a grammar school at Stockport.[450]Then, in 1505, another Lord Mayor, Sir Bartholomew Read, founded by will a school at Cromer and also appointed the Goldsmiths’ Company as trustees.[451]
The general conclusion we seem to be justified in drawing from these instances is, that the value of education was being more and more realised, and that the duty of making provision for education ceased to be regarded as exclusively the function of the Church. This does not mean that there existed an idea that education was not still regarded as something which should be closely associated with the Church, but rather, that the idea had originated and developed that organisations which represented the municipality and handicrafts respectively, also possessed a responsibility in making provision for the education of the young.
In addition to making provision for schools, the gilds were important educative forces in other directions. They constituted one of the most important agencies for breaking down social exclusiveness and “in transmitting social manners and ideals from a narrower to a wider circle.†As the gilds had increased in number, so they increased in wealth and importance. They built halls which were the external testimony to the position they occupied. At times they entertained kings and other magnates of the realm and admitted persons of standing to honorary membership. Music and the drama were also fostered by the gilds. Several gilds existed in England[452]with the object of developing an interest in music. The performance ofdramatic representations was a common feature of the gilds.
Membership of the gilds also proved to be a training for the performance of the duties of citizenship and of society, as the members of such organisations were brought into intimate relation with a wider circle than their own individual interests would furnish, and they would be required to take part in the transactions of the business of the gild. It is noteworthy that gilds were organised on a social basis, and that women were admitted to the membership of the merchant and craft gilds, as well as to that of the social and religious gilds. Thus at Kingston, the Gild of the Blessed Virgin Mary was founded in 1357 by 10 men and 13 women,[453]and the Gild of Corpus Christi founded in the same town in 1338 included 18 women among its 43 founders.[454]The sons and daughters of these founders might be admitted to membership of the gilds without initiatory payment.[455]Again, at Coventry, the names of women as well as men are mentioned in the Charter of the gild merchant.[456]
One other point may be mentioned, a point which has been described as “the most important educational service of the gilds.†This service was the growth of the system of apprenticeship. Originally, apprenticeship was merely a private contract between an individual and his prospective master. With the development of gilds, regulations specifying the conditions of such apprenticeship began to be issued,e.g.the master craftsman might teach his art to as many members of his family as he pleased, but he could only have one other apprentice. Moreover, from the outset, the apprentice was under the special protection of the gild which was practically a court of appeal in the event of any serious complaint on the part of the apprentice. Important, however, as this topic is, a further consideration of it would lead us beyond the special limits of our investigation.
CHANTRIES.
One of the characteristics of the ecclesiastical life of this country during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries was the institution of chantries; altogether upwards of 2,000 of them are known to have been founded during the period. As chantry priests played an important part in connection with the provision of educational facilities in England, the topic of chantries calls for careful consideration.
A chantry may be defined as a foundation for the purpose of providing a priest who shall pray daily, primarily for the soul of the founder, and secondly for the souls of all Christian people. The earliest instances of chantries definitely recognised as such, date from the latter part of the thirteenth century. The “Taxatio of Pope Nicholas†only mentions two; one which was founded by Hugh of Lincoln, who died in 1225, and the other which existed at Hatherton in the county of Warwick. The custom gradually grew, but did not become common until the fifteenth century, the period in which the number of such institutions largely increased.[457]
The idea of offering prayers for the souls of the faithful departed was not a new one. The practice is at least as old as the institution of the Christian faith, and is a custom which is perfectly natural to those who believe in the immortality of the soul, and a state of future personal existence. It had also been a custom, “from timeimmemorial,†that prayers for the souls of the founders were regularly offered up in religious houses and other ecclesiastical foundations. A list of donors and benefactors was carefully preserved, and prayers for their good estate were offered up for them while they were living, and for the repose of their soul after death. Thus, the “Catalogus Benefactorum†of St. Albans Monastery, with its detailed account of every benefaction, is still preserved in the British Museum.[458]The distinctive mark of a chantry was, that it was expressly founded for the apparently selfish purpose of making financial provision to secure the prayers of others for the future well-being of the soul of the founder.
But though this selfish and personal purpose may have been the dominating thought in the case of some foundations, yet it is probable that it was not the only purpose of the majority of these institutions. The primary point to be remembered is that it is a laudable desire to wish to perpetuate one’s memory, especially if the memorial should take a form which will benefit the social community. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the prevailing method of doing this was by establishing a chantry.
In attempting to investigate the reasons why chantries were founded, we are faced from the outset with a difficulty. The licence in mortmain, by which permission to assign lands for the support of the chantry priest was effected, scarcely ever mentions any other object for the memorial except the chantry itself, whilst the foundation statutes, which enumerate more specifically the purpose of the founder, are very rarely forthcoming.
An example will make this clear. In 1414 Langley, Bishop of Durham, issues to himself an episcopal licence empowering the founding of the chantry he wished to endow. In the same year he, in his temporal capacity as Earl of a County Palatine, grants a licence in mortmain, authorising the chantry to hold lands and to make the chantry priest a corporation.[459]Both these records areavailable, but in neither of them is there any reference to therealobjects for which the chantry was to be instituted. Consequently, if further information was not forthcoming, we would assume that all that the Bishop of Durham had done was to evince, in some tangible manner, his belief in the efficacy of masses for the departed.
Fortunately, however, there still survives a lengthy deed,[460]dated the day after the licences to which we have referred were granted. This deed specifies that the priests appointed to the chantry were to keep schools of grammar and of song respectively, in addition to offering prayers for the souls of the departed, and that a certain sum of money out of the proceeds of the chantry was to be used for the purpose of distribution to the poor.[461]
Strangely enough, we are dependent for information as to the purposes of chantries, on the instrument which brought about their destruction. In 1545 was passed the Chantries’ Act of Henry VIII. This Act began by reciting that many people had been appropriating the endowments of “Colleges, Freechapelles, Chantries, Hospitalles, Fraternities, Brotherhoods, Guilds and Stipendarie Priests,†and that the expenses of the war with France and Scotland had been heavy, and then proceeded to give authority to the king to send out commissioners to investigate the nature of these endowments and afterwards to take such action as he thought fit.
“Apparently, Henry had a fit of reaction after the Chantries’ Act was passed. He is reported to have dissolved Parliament with a speech in which he said he was going to reform chantries, not destroy them.â€[462]
A new Chantries’ Act was passed in the first parliament of Edward VI.[463]The object of this Act was essentially different from that of its predecessor. The preamble to the Act specified that it was thought that “a great part of superstition and errors in Christian religion has been brought into the minds and estimation of men, by reasonof their ignorance of the very true and perfect Salvation through Christ Jesus, and by devising and fancying vain opinions of purgatory and masses satisfactory to be done for them which be departed, the which doctrine and vain opinion by nothing more is maintained and upholden than by the abuse of trentals, chantries, and other provisions made for the continuance of the said blindness and ignorance.â€
The Act proceeded to vest in the Crown “all Colleges, Free Chapels and Chantriesâ€; “all Lands given for the finding of a Stipendiary Priest for everâ€; “all payments made by corporations, gilds, fraternities, companies, or fellowships, of mysteries or crafts.â€
A commission was to be issued, under the Great Seal, to investigate the origin and purpose of the various chantries, etc., to arrange for the continuance of such charitable objects as they deemed necessary, and to assign pensions to the incumbents whose office was abolished.
It is to the returns that were made to these commissioners that we are mainly indebted for a knowledge of the objects and purposes for which the chantries were provided. The purposes, which are most frequently mentioned, are:—
1. Provision of a priest to teach children freely.2. Assistance of the parish priest.3. Care of bridges.4. Relief of the poor.5. Provision of almshouses.6. Repairing the parish church.7. Equipping soldiers.8. Repairing the sea walls.9. Provision of lamps.10. Provision of dowries.
1. Provision of a priest to teach children freely.2. Assistance of the parish priest.3. Care of bridges.4. Relief of the poor.5. Provision of almshouses.6. Repairing the parish church.7. Equipping soldiers.8. Repairing the sea walls.9. Provision of lamps.10. Provision of dowries.
Of these purposes, the most important was probably the provision of an endowment to enable a priest to keep a school. Mr. Leach, who was the first writer to realise fully the significance of the chantries in relation to the provision of facilities for education, states that “in all259 schools appear in these records.â€[464]Two or three examples will serve to make clear the nature of the provision for education made by the chantry bequests.
“Wymborne.
Cantaria Margarite Comitisse Rychemond et Derbie matris Domini Regis Henrici Septimi.
Memorandum that this was foundyd to the intent that the incumbent thereof should say masse for the solles of the founders and to be a Scolemaster, to teche frely almanner of childern Gramer within the said College.â€[465]
“The Parish of Newland.
Gryndoures chauntrye.
Foundyd to Fynde a preste and a gramer scole half free for ever and to kepe a scoller sufficientt to teche under hym contynually.â€[466]
“Towcester.
The Colledg or Spones Chauntree.
Founded to mayntene 2 Prestes, beyng men of good knoweledg. The one to preach the Worde of God. And the other to kepe a Grammar Scole.â€[467]
Our task is now that of attempting to interpret the reasons why the chantries were founded.
We must give due weight to the ostensible object, which must be also regarded as the primary one. A widespread belief in the efficacy of prayers for the departed existed; unfortunately, there also prevailed, apparently, a belief in the value of hired prayers. It must be clearly realised that it was for the purpose of securing prayer for thewelfare of the living and the repose of the departed soul that these chantries were founded.
But, side by side with this main object, there also existed in the minds of the majority of the founders a desire to benefit the community. We have already enumerated the main directions in which it was proposed to effect the benefit. The remarkable fact is, that, in as many as 259 cases, education was regarded as of such importance that specific arrangements were made to provide for it.
In a large number of cases, it is specified that the proceeds of the chantry are to be devoted to the support of a priest to assist the parish priest. We venture to suggest that there is to be found here a clue to the explanation of many of the unspecified trusts and particularly of those in which it is expressly laid down that it was a purpose of the chantry to provide a priest for educational purposes. We have previously shown that it was a recognised duty of the parish priest to keep a school. The growth in the duties of a parish priest would make it difficult for him effectively to discharge this function; possibly, in some cases, he might be incapable of doing so; moreover, the progress of the universities had caused the profession of a teacher to be a definite one. Our analysis of the social structure[468]has enabled us to realise that the increasing complexity of our industrial system and the social and economic changes which occurred, had caused education to be more necessary and to be esteemed more highly. The “Paston Letters†show that the dependents and servants of great households were able to read and write.[469]Thorold Rogers states that the accounts of bailiffs afford proof that they were not illiterate, and he also evidences that artisans were able to write out an account.[470]We must not, however, assume that a knowledge of reading and writing, though probably widespread, was universal. It is interesting to note that, of the twenty witnesses who were examined in connection with the enquiry touching Sir John Fastolf’s will in 1446, elevenwere described as “illiterateâ€; they consisted of five husbandmen, one gentleman, one smith, one cook, one roper, one tailor, and one mariner. The description “literatus†was applied to seven persons, two husbandmen, two merchants, and one whose occupation was not specified.[471]The two remaining witnesses could both read and write.
Our hypothesis is, that the founder of the chantry desired to be of assistance, both to the parish priest himself, and to the children of the parish. He sought to accomplish this by leaving lands to provide an endowment to support a priest who would relieve the parish priest of his duties as a teacher. This hypothesis would also help to explain the gradual disappearance of the parish priest as the responsible master of the parochial school, a disappearance which would be accelerated by the increasing recognition of the fact that teaching was a specialist function, to be entrusted to a person expressly appointed for that purpose.
A most important and noteworthy feature of some chantries is, that in certain parishes they were founded by the inhabitants themselves, for the express purpose of providing educational facilities. We do not imply that the religious element was lacking, or that the doctrine of the efficacy of prayer for the departed was lightly held. In all probability, the religious motive was a strong impelling force. For our present purpose, the significant fact is, that in certain communities some of the inhabitants founded chantries with the provision of facilities for education as the expressed object. We have been able to trace the origin of the following schools to the action of the inhabitants, but it is not claimed that the list is exhaustive.
We may now consider the establishment of typical cases.
Basingstoke.
The school at Basingstoke was founded “by the decision of the inhabitantes at the begynnyng.â€[472]Apparently, the inhabitants of the town had formed themselves into a gild called the “Brotherhood of the Holy Ghost†for this special purpose. Their school can be traced back to 1244, and is the earliest school of which at present we have any knowledge, whose origin may be attributed to the enterprise of the inhabitants.
Northallerton.
This school existed before 1321, as is evidenced by the fact that in that year the master was appointed to the school by the prior of Durham.[473]It was founded by “certen well disposed persones—for the better bringinge up of the children of the towne.â€[474]
Deritend.
The existence of this school can be traced back as far as 1448, and is due to the enterprise of “the inhabitans of the same hamlet cauled Deretende.â€[475]
Lancaster.
The first available reference to a school at Lancaster occurs in a deed in the priory chartulary which dates from the reign of Henry III.[476]The school was “ordeyned and founded by the Mayor and burgesses of Lancaster.â€[477]
Aldeborough.
“Having no foundacion but presented by certain feoffees of severall landes gyven by syndry persons of the said paroch.â€[478]
Eccleshall.
“The enhabitants of Eccleshall did among themselfes, without incorporacion, erect two Gyylds ... and one of the same priestes have alwais kept a scole and taught pore mens children of the same parishe freely.â€[479]
East Retford.
“Founded by the predecessors of the bailiffs, burgesses, and Commywalts of the said towne.â€[480]
Gargrave.
“Founded by the inhabitants there.â€[481]
Odeham.
“Founded of the devocion of the inhabitantes ... to the intente to teche children gramer.â€[482]
Staunton.
“Founded by the parishenours there upon theyr Devocion.†It was the purpose of this chantry that the priest appointed should assist the incumbent “in his necessitieâ€; apparently this assistance included the teaching of “many pore mens chylderne.â€[483]
Wragby.
“There is no foundacion of the same but certen landes and tenementes purchased by the parishioners to th’entente ... to teach chyldren in the saide paroche.â€[484]
Truro.
“Of the Benyvolence of the Mayer and burges of the saide Towne to fynde a preste for ever to mynyster in the parish churche and to kepe a scole there.â€[485]
As we have stated, these instances we have quoted cannot claim to be exhaustive. They are examples which are available, and they serve to indicate the noteworthy fact that a consciousness of the value of education existed among the inhabitants of many towns and villages in England in the Middle Ages. The question is sometimes raised, whether these schools were elementary or secondary schools, or whether some of them might be classed as elementary and others as secondary.[486]The question is quite irrelevant. The distinction between elementary and secondary education is entirely a modern one. In fact, it is difficult, even now, to determine the meaning of these terms. If we regard the elementary school as one in which the chief academic aim is to teach the children to read and write English, and to work elementary problems in arithmetic, and a secondary school as one in which the classical languages form an important part of the curriculum, then we have set out the difference between two types of schools which were prevalent during the greater part of the eighteenth and nineteenth century; but this distinction is inapplicable to the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The chantry school did not attempt to teach English, but Latin, as Latin still continued to be the language of the Church of this country. Of the 259 instances of chantry schools which Mr. Leach has collected, 193 of them he regards as grammar schools; the remaining schools he classes either as song schools or as elementary schools.[487]The distinction is quite unnecessary. The chantry schools were simply the parochial church schools, which were now supported by a separate endowment, and taught by a priest who was practically able to devote his whole time to the work, instead of beingunder the control of the parish priest who, in many cases, would scarcely be able to set aside a definite part of each day for the work of teaching.
We have pointed out that the child who attended these church schools was required previously to have obtained a knowledge of the alphabet at least. If Colet was setting out the current practice in the statutes which he drew up for St. Paul’s School, even more knowledge was required antecedent to admission, as he states that “the master shall admit these children as they be offirid from tyme to tyme; but first se that they can saye the catechyzon, and also that he can rede and write competently, else let him not be admitted.â€
In the case of some of the chantry schools, express arrangements were made for elementary teaching. Thus, the bell ringer at Glasney was required to teach the ABC as a part of his duty[488]at Brecon; at Chumleigh it was expressly stipulated that the ABC was to be taught by the chaplain;[489]at Launceston it was stipulated that an old man chosen by the mayor was to teach the alphabet.[490]Then, the chantry priest at Newland was required to provide “meate, dryncke, clothe and all other necessaries†to one of his scholars who, in return, was to assist with the teaching of the little ones.[491]
The provision of exhibitions to assist in supporting poor scholars at schools and universities was also a purpose of some chantries. Thus, at Brecon, twenty poor scholars were to receive 24/- each annually:[492]at Chumleigh, a part of the proceeds of the chantry was employed to support “a lyttle childe who goythe to scole, and hathe no other profyttes towardes his fynding and sustentacionâ€[493]; at Eton “70 scollers, 13 poore children and 10 choristours†were to be supported:[494]at Stamford “the Revenues and proffyttes thereof hathe byn convertyd only to the use of ... an infant of the age of 13 or 14 yeres, towards his exhibicion at Schole.â€[495]Other instances of the provision ofschool exhibitions are to be found in the chantry certificates relating to Houghton, Hull, Lincoln, Lyme Regis, Newland, Rotherham, Sullington, Thornton, Winchester, and Wotton-under-Edge.
Turning next to the chantries which were employed for the purpose of supporting students at the universities, we find that the return to the chantry commissioners, which relates to the chantry of North Wroxall, states that: “the sayd Incumbent is a student in Oxforde, but no prieste; and, ferthermore, a verey pore man, havynge no parentis, or any other lyvinge to kepe hym to scole.â€[496]In the return for the chantry at Norton are given the names of 8 men, among whom the proceeds of the chantry are shared, so as to enable them “to studye at the universite.â€[497]Other instances of chantry foundations for the purpose of supporting university students are those of Asserton, Calne, Crediton, Denton, Dorchester, Holbeach, etc.
The analysis of the chantry foundations we have given, serves to illustrate our contention that, not only was there a growing appreciation of education but that there also existed a growing sense of the responsibility of the community, or of representative members of the community, to make provision for education, and that the responsibility for making this provision did not rest on the Church alone. At the same time, the Church was alive to the necessity of emphasising the duty of the clergy to interest themselves in education, as is evidenced by the canon promulgated at the Convocation of Canterbury in 1529 which intimated to the “rectors, vicars and chantry priests that when divine service is done, they shall be employed in study, prayer, lectures or other proper business, becoming their profession: namely, teaching boys the alphabet, reading, singing, or grammar; and on three days in the week, for three or at least two hours a day, shall, in the absence of some lawful hindrance, occupy themselves in reading Holy Scriptures or some approved doctor. And the ordinaries shall make diligent inquiry about this in their visitations, to the end that they may severely chastiseand punish lazy priests, or those who spend their time badly.â€[498]
This canon was practically reiterated by the Royal Injunctions of 1547, which prescribed that “all chauntery priests shall exercise themselves in teaching youth to read and write, and bring them up in good manners and other vertuous exercises.â€[499]
The practical effect of the Chantries’ Act of 1547 was that it put an end to the educational provision which the founders of the chantries had made. This was not contemplated by the Act. On the contrary, the Act gave to the commissioners “full power and authoritie to assigne and shall appoynte, in every place where guylde fraternitye, the Preist or Incumbent of anny Chauntrye in Esse ... oughte to have kepte a gramer scoole or a preacher†for the continuance of such school.[500]The usual practice of the commissioners was to vest the chantry lands in the Crown, and to make a Crown charge of a certain annual sum, equivalent to the stipend which the teacher of the grammar school was then receiving. But as the value of money has now decreased to so considerable an extent, and the value of land has so enormously increased, the practical effect of this legislation, as we have indicated, was the disendowment of the educational provision which had been made by the founders of gilds, colleges, and chantries.
MONASTICISM AND EDUCATION IN THE LATER MIDDLE AGES.
The problem of the relation of monasteries to education in the later Middle Ages is an obscure one. On the one hand, there is the popular opinion (which is followed, generally, by uncritical writers) that the monasteries afforded the main means of education at this time; on the other hand, the tendency of modern research into the nature of the educational work of the monasteries is to maintain that no general work for education was accomplished by them.[501]Effectively to set out the work of the monastic orders for education, it is advisable to consider separately: (I.) schools in connection with monasteries, (II.) almonry schools, (III.) the education of girls, (IV.) the education of the novices, (V.) the monks and university education, (VI.) education and the mendicant orders.
I.Schools in connection with Monasteries.
As a general principle, it may be assumed that a school existed in connection with every large monastery. The connection consisted in the fact that these schools were maintained by the monasteries, and that the master was appointed by the monastic authorities. These schoolsfall into one or other of two classes: they were either founded by the monasteries, or they were handed over to the monasteries, which acted as trustees for their maintenance, by their real founders. It is not easy in every case to determine whether the school was the property of the monastery or was merely held on trust by them. The commissioners, entrusted with the task of securing the dissolution of all the monasteries, did not attempt to do so. The property held by the monastery was confiscated, regardless of whether the property was held on trust for other purposes, or was indisputably the possession of the monastery. Among the earliest of the schools which we know of, as being connected with monasteries are St. Albans, c. 1100;[502]Christ Church, Hants, c. 1100;[503]Thetford, c. 1114;[504]Huntingdon, c. 1127;[505]Dunstable, c. 1131;[506]Reading, c. 1135;[507]Gloucester, c. 1137;[508]Derby, c. 1150;[509]and Bedford, c. 1160.[510]We know that Bourne School was in connection with the monastery, because the Abbot of Bourne possessed the patronage of the school.[511]For a similar reason, it can be shown that the school at Bury St. Edmunds was monastic.[512]
Passing next to give instances of the schools which were held by monasteries as trustees, we may mention Lewes Grammar School, which was founded in 1512 by the will of Agnes Morley, who provided that the appointment of the schoolmaster should be vested in the prior of Lewes.[513]We note, too, that Peter of Blockesley gave possessions to the prior and convent of Coventry in trust for the school.[514]The school at Bruton may also be quoted asillustrative. By an endowment deed of 1519,[515]various possessions were given to the Abbot of Bruton, subject to the condition that he should provide a schoolhouse and house for the master, and also pay him £10 a year. The returns to the chantry commissioners from Bruton[516]state that, after the dissolution, the schoolmaster was no longer called upon to work, but as he had had a pension assigned him, he was able “to lyve licentiously at will than to travaile in good education of yewthe†“to the greate Decaye as well of vertuous bringing uppe of yewthe of the saide shire in all good lernyng, as also of the inhabitants of the Kinges said town of Brewton.â€
II.Almonry Schools.
An essential duty discharged by the inmates of a monastery was the offering of divine worship. Effectively to discharge this duty, the voices of boys were required in addition to those of the men. It is difficult to determine when this custom originated; probably it was adopted first of all in the collegiate churches, and then subsequently imitated by the monasteries. The earliest available reference to an almonry school in this country is in connection with St. Paul’s Cathedral. A statute which dates c. 1190 refers to the boys of the almonry, and informs us that they lived on alms.[517]Lincoln, York, and Salisbury are three other secular cathedrals, at which choristers, who were boarded and lodged together, were maintained.
The boys, who acted as choristers in the monasteries, were lodged at the outer gate; they were clothed, fed, and educated at the expense of the monks. The earliest reference available to almonry boys in monasteries dates from 1320, when it was provided that “no scholar shall be taken into the almonry unless he can read, and sing in the chapel, and is ten years old.â€[518]The earliest statutes which set forth the work of the almonry are those of St.Albans, and date from 1339. They include the following regulations.
(1) “Let the boys be admitted to live there for a term of five years at the most, to whom this period suffices for becoming proficient in grammar.
(2) No poor scholar shall absent himself from the Almonry without the licence of the sub-Almoner, under the penalty of expulsion until reconciliation.
(3) Whosoever is convicted or notorious for being incontinent, a night walker, noisy, disorderly, shall be wholly expelled.
(4) Immediately on admission, the scholars shall shave an ample tonsure, after the manner of choristers, and shall cut their hair as becomes clerks.
(5) Every scholar shall say daily the matins of Our Lady for himself, and on every festival day the Seven Psalms for the convent and our founders.â€[519]
In the schedule of the almoner’s duties at St. Albans[520]it is stated that the almoner is responsible for the repair of the studies of the monks, and of the grammar schoolhouse in the town. He has also the right of appointing the master of grammar, subject to the approval of the archdeacon. He is entrusted with the general care and supervision of the boys, and for the payment of the stipend of the schoolmaster.
A description of the almonry school at Durham is given in the “Rites of Durham.â€[521]This account states that “there were certain poor children called children of the Almery, who only were maintained with learning and relieved with the alms and benevolence of the whole house, having their meat and drink in a loft, on the north side of the abbey gate. And the said poor children went daily to school at the Farmary School, without the abbey gates; which school was founded by the prior of the said abbey, and at the charges of the said house.â€
There is also a reference to this school in theValor Ecclesiasticus[522]which mentions “De magno solario supra tenebatur scola.†The same authority tells us that there were thirty poor scholars who attended this school.
The duties commonly undertaken by the schoolmaster of the almonry boys may be gathered from the agreement entered into in 1515, between the abbot of the monastery of Gloucester and the schoolmaster he appointed. The agreement specified that the master was to “teach the art of grammar to all the youthful brethren of the monastery sent to him by the abbot, and thirteen boys of the clerk’s chambers; and shall teach and inform five or six or seven boys apt and ready to learn in plain song, divided or broken song and discant, sufficiently and diligently.†In addition, the schoolmaster was to sing and play the organ at the monastery services.[523]
Besides the almonry schools in connection with the monasteries at St. Albans, Durham, and Gloucester, to which we have referred, almonry schools have also been traced at Canterbury,[524]Reading,[525]Westminster,[526]Winchester,[527]Bardney,[528]Worcester,[529]St. Mary’s Abbey, York,[530]the Carthusian Monastery, Coventry,[531]Coventry Priory.[532]
The examples given support the probability that every monastery supported an almonry school. Admission to these schools was in some cases regarded as a valuable scholarship. This is evidenced by a letter which Queen Philippa wrote to the prior of Canterbury in 1332, and in which she asks for a boy to be admitted into the almonry “to be maintained like other poor scholars of his estate.â€[533]
It would be an idle task to attempt to estimate thevalue of these almonry schools for national education. We do not possess any definite information as to the number of boys who were educated in this way at each monastery, neither do we know for certain the number of monasteries which provided these facilities. All we can really assert is, that a large majority of the chief monasteries provided board and residence and education for a number of children, who would otherwise be unable to obtain any education. These children would learn to sing and read, and would also master grammar to the extent necessary to proceed to the universities if they desired to do so.
Mr. G. C. Coulton warns us that there was a great temptation for the monastic authorities to neglect the almonry schools. He points out that, in 1520, the visitors found that Norwich Cathedral Priory had cut down its almonry scholars from thirteen to eight, and that in 1526 it was noted at Rushworth that “pueri in collegio non continue aluntur sumptibus collegii sed custodiunt pecora parentum nonnunquam.â€[534]
III.The Education of Girls.
When Robert Aske, in 1536, was endeavouring to justify his rebellion against the action of Henry VIII. in suppressing the monasteries, he stated as one of the good works of these institutions that “in nunneries their daughters (were) brought up in virtue.â€[535]The education of girls of the higher classes was one of the duties undertaken by some of the convents, but it is difficult to estimate the extent to which this was done. The available referencesto the education of girls at convents may be readily summarised: at the time of the dissolution, there were from thirty to forty girls being educated at Pollesworth Nunnery, who were described as “gentylmen’s childrenâ€[536]; at St. Mary’s Nunnery, Winchester, there were twenty-six girls who are similarly described.[537]A claim has also been made[538]that girls were educated at Carrow Abbey, Norfolk, but Mr. Coulton shows that “among all the 280 persons who are recorded to have boarded with the nuns of Carrow during forty-six years (an average of six a year), not one can be clearly shown to be a schoolgirl.â€[539]The point that needs to be emphasised is that the question of a nunnery school, as Mr. Coulton indicates, was at bottom a financial one. Convents which were not well endowed found it necessary to have recourse to some means of increasing their revenues, and teaching was one of the possible means of doing so. The early references to schoolgirls in episcopal registers show that an effort was made either to restrict or prohibit the practice. The reason of this episcopal opposition was the fear that the institution of a school would break down the discipline of the convent, and distract the attention of the nuns. Thus, at Elstow in 1359, Bishop Gynwell would only allow girls under ten and boys under six to remain there, because, “by the living together of secular women and nuns, the contemplation of religion is withdrawn and scandal is engendered.â€[540]Very few other references to the education of girls in monasteries have been traced so far. Dr. Abram tells us that “In the Chancery Proceedings it is recorded that ‘Lawrens Knyght, gentleman,’ arranged that the Prioress of Cornworthy, Devon, should have his two daughters, aged respectively seven and ten, ‘to scole’ and he agreed to pay her twenty pence weekly for their meat and drink.â€[541]In English literature, the only instance we have been able to discover is the well-known reference of Chaucer to the Miller’s wife.
IV.The Education of the Novices.
Abbot Gasquet has written a careful and interesting account of the life of a novice in a claustral school of the fifteenth century.[542]Dealing with St. Peter’s Abbey, Westminster, he says, “The western walk was sacred to the novices, whose master took the first place, with the youngest nearest to him. Their method of sitting was peculiar: they were placed one behind the other, so that the face of one looked on the back of his neighbour. And this was always the case, except when there was general conversation in the cloister. The only fixed seats were those of the abbot, prior, and master of novices; the rest were placed according to the disposition of the prior, sub-prior, or novice-master, to whom the care and due order of the cloister were specially committed. There, in the morning after the chapter, and at other intervals during the day, the novices attended to their tasks, and one by one took their books to their master, who either heard their reading himself, or sent them to some other senior for help or instruction.â€[543]
The “Rites of Durhamâ€[544]also gives us a description of a novices’ school. It is there stated that the school was held both in the morning and in the afternoon in the “weast ally†of the cloisters. Boys began to attend these schools when they were seven years of age, and the eldest learned monk acted as their tutor. The novices were fed, clothed, and educated gratuitously. If they were “apt to lernynge ... and had a pregnant wyt withall†they were afterwards sent to Oxford to study divinity; otherwise, they were kept at their books till they could understand their service and the scriptures, and then became candidates for ordination to the priesthood.
Incidental references to the school of the novices occur in various monastic records. Thus, we learn that when Richard II. held his first parliament in 1378, at Gloucester,he and his court were lodged in the abbey, with the result that the monks were obliged to have their meals “in the schoolhouse.â€[545]The same chronicler also laments the destruction of turf in the cloisters, which “was so worn by the exercises of the wrestlers and ball players there that no traces of green were left on it.â€[546]
The Benedictine Statutes of 1334 emphasised the importance of study, and in order that monks might subsequently be fitted to proceed to the universities, it was decreed and ordained that “in all monastic cathedral churches, priories or other conventual and solemn places of sufficient means belonging to such order or vows, there shall henceforth be kept a master to teach the monks such elementary sciences, viz. grammar, logic and philosophy.â€[547]If, however, a competent teaching monk could not be found in the monastery, a secular priest was to be appointed for the purpose who, in addition to his residence, food and clothing, was to receive £20 a year—a large salary for the time.[548]
Some records are still available of agreements to teach between the prior of a monastery and a secular priest. As an example may be quoted the one made between the prior of Durham and a priest who covenanted to teach “the monks of Durham and eight secular boys.†He was especially to teach “plain song, accompanied song, singing plain prick note, faburdon, discant square note and counterpoint,†and to play on the organ at the monastic services.[549]
Enquiry was also made from time to time to ascertain whether sufficient attention was being paid to the education of the novices. Thus, at the visitation of the priory of St. Peter’s, Ipswich, in 1514, the complaint was made that there was no schoolmaster at the monastery;[550]in 1526, the monastery was required to provide a master to teach the novices grammar.[551]
Similarly, among the defects noted by William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, at his visitation of the monastery in 1511, was the lack of a “skilled teacher of grammar ... to teach the novices and other youths grammar.†The archbishop emphasised his point by stating that “in default of such instruction it happens that most of the monks celebrating mass and performing other divine service are wholly ignorant of what they read, to the great scandal and disgrace both of religion in general and the monastery in particular.â€[552]It is interesting to note that a statement is appended to this criticism, intimating that “one of the brethren is deputed to that work and has already begun to do it, and teaches the younger monks daily.â€[553]
V.The Monks and the Universities.
Originally, we have seen, the monasteries were the centres of the intellectual activities of this country. The progress of the universities caused a change in this respect, with the result that Oxford and Cambridge gradually became the chief places of theological, as well as other branches of academic study. It then became necessary that the monks should adapt themselves to the new order of things, and arrange that those of their number who showed ability should avail themselves of the opportunities of advanced study which the new centres of learning afforded.
It is not possible to state when monks first went to either Oxford or Cambridge for the purpose of study, but it must have been at a comparatively early date in the thirteenth century, because at a general chapter of the Southern Benedictines held at Abingdon in 1275, it was decided to erect a house at Oxford in which “the brethren of our order who are to be sent from the various monasteries may live properly.â€[554]It was further resolved that each Benedictine house in the province of Canterbury should contribute for the first year “twopence in everymark of all their spiritual and temporal possessions according to the assessment of the former lord of Norwich ... and in the following years shall contribute a penny a mark to provide for the said places and other things in the said chapter.â€[555]It was also enacted, at the same time, that a theological lecturer to instruct the monks should be appointed in every monastery, as quickly as possible.
The first definite mention of monastic students at Oxford occurs in a letter written by Bishop Giffard of Worcester to the Chancellor of the University, requesting that “a doctor in the divine page†might be nominated to instruct the monks who were in residence.[556]In 1287, a site for the erection of a college for the monks, which was known as Gloucester College (now Worcester), was conveyed to the abbot and convent of Gloucester.[557]
This was not the only college for monks which was established at Oxford. In 1286, the prior and convent of Durham had purchased land there (which is now the site of Trinity College) for the purpose of securing further education for the monks of Durham.[558]
In addition to these institutions, the monks of Christ Church, Oxford, had a hall of their own as early as 1331.[559]This they sold to the monks of Westminster, after acquiring a regularly endowed college of their own known as Canterbury Hall. Canterbury Hall, which was founded by Simon Islip, Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1362, was at first intended to be used both by seculars and regulars. This policy did not prove a success; the college was then used by the regular clergy only, and continued to be used by them until the dissolution.[560]Other monastic educational establishments at Oxford were the Cistercian Abbey of Rewley, St. Bernard’s College, and St. Mary’s College.[561]
Returning to Gloucester College—the most important of the monastic colleges—we note that the first of theBenedictine monks to obtain the D.D. degree at Oxford was William Brock, who achieved that honour in 1298. The occasion was regarded as important, and a feast, which was attended by the leading English members of the order, was held to commemorate it.[562]