BIBLIOGRAPHY

A.Early Monastic History.SeeCambridge Medieval History, vol.I, pp. 521-42 (by Dom E. C. Butler, abbot of Downside). A full bibliography will be found on pp. 683-7 of the same volume.

B.Religious Orders.(1) Benedictine monks. The rule of St Benedict has been edited by Dom E. C. Butler, Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1911. There is a translation by abbot Gasquet in the 'King's Classics' series.

(2) Carthusian monks. See H. V. le Bas inYorks. Archaeol. Journal,XVIII, 241-52.

(3) Cistercian monks. SeeCistercian Statutes, ed. J. T. Fowler, 1890 (reprinted fromYorks. Archaeol. Journal, with preface containing references to original sources). See also J. T. Micklethwaite,The Cistercian Order(Yorks. Archaeol. Journal,XV, 245-68, reprinted as separate pamphlet).

(4) Augustinian canons. The letter of St Augustine on which the rule was founded is no.CCXIin hisEpistolae, printed with his other works in Migne,Patrologiae Latinae Cursus. The rule is printed by J. W. Clark,Observances in Use at the Augustinian Priory of S. Giles and S. Andrew at Barnwell, Cambridgeshire, Cambridge, 1897, pp. 2-23: see also the introduction to the same volume, pp. xxxi-civ, for a description of the customs of the order.

(5) Gilbertine canons. See Rose Graham,St Gilbert of Sempringham and the Gilbertines, 1902.

(6) Premonstratensian canons. See F. A. Gasquet,Collectanea Anglo-Premonstratensia, 3 vols., 1906 (Camden Soc., 3rd ser.). Some of the statutes are printed by J. W. Clark,op. cit.pp. 101-4.

(7) Nuns. See Lina Eckenstein,Women and Monasticism, Cambridge, 1896.

(8) Friars. SeeMonumenta Franciscana, 2 vols., 1858, 1882 (Rolls ser.), ed. J. S. Brewer and R. Howlett.

A number of general documents of great importance are prefixed to the accounts of individual houses of the several orders in Dugdale'sMonasticon Anglicanum, 8 vols., 1817-30, ed. Caley, Ellis and Bandinel—e.g. the CarthusianTractatus statutorum ... pro noviciis, and theVitaandInstitutiones Sancti Gilebertiprefixed to the accounts of houses of the order of Sempringham.

C.English Monasteries: History.Dugdale,Monasticon, ut sup., contains the text of a great number of documents, taken from various sources, relating to the large majority of English religious houses, together with a carefully annotated account of each house and a list of its heads. These accounts and lists have been supplemented and to some extent superseded by the articles upon the several religious houses which are contained in the published volumes of theVictoria History of the Counties of England, now in progress. The documents are in great part selected from theMS.chartularies of the various monasteries, of which many have been preserved in public and private collections. Some chartularies have been printed in full—e.g. the Surtees Society has published those of Newminster, Rievaulx and Whitby abbeys, and of Brinkburn and Guisbrough priories, and chartularies of Gloucester, Hyde and Ramsey abbeys, and the register of Malmesbury abbey have appeared in the Rolls series.Memorials of Fountains Abbey, 2 vols., ed. J. R. Walbran, andThe Priory of Hexham, 2 vols., ed. J. Raine (Surtees Soc.), contain collections of charters in addition to other historical matter.

A bibliography of some of the most important sources for the history of the monastic life is prefixed to abbot Gasquet'sEnglish Monastic Life, 1904, a valuable account of the constitution and customs of religious houses, followed by an appendix containing the most complete list which has yet appeared of English monastic foundations. An annotated list (The English Student's Monasticon) forms vol.IIof Mackenzie E. C. Walcott'sEnglish Minsters, 1879.

A large number of monastic chronicles have been printed in the Rolls series. The period before the Norman conquest is represented by theChronicon Monasterii de Abingdon, Thomas of Elmham'sHistoria Monasterii S. Augustini Cantuariensis, theLiber Monasterii de Hyda, theChronicle of the Abbey of Ramsey, and theVita S. Oswaldi(inHistorians of the Church of York, vol.I). Later history is contained in theAnnales Monastici, 5 vols. (Annals of Bermondsey, Burton, Margam, Oseney, Tewkesbury and Waverley abbeys, and of Dunstable, Winchester and Worcester priories), theChronicon Abbatiae de Evesham,Historia et Cartularium Monasterii S. Petri Gloucestriae, 3 vols.,Chronicon Monasterii de Melsa(Meaux), 3 vols., Walsingham'sGesta Abbatum Monasterii S. Albani, 3 vols.,Registra quorundam abbatum S. Albani(15 cent.), 2 vols., andMemorials of St Edmund's Abbey, 3 vols. Jocelyn of Brakelond's and other chronicles were printed by the Camden Society among their publications: there is a translation of Jocelyn in the 'King's Classics.'

For custom-books, monastic account-books, etc., reference may be made to abbot Gasquet's bibliography, ut sup., where also there are notes of printed editions of monastic visitations and episcopal registers. The registers of archbishops Giffard and Wickwane of York (ed. W. Brown for the Surtees Soc.) and that of archbishop Romeyn, about to appear under the same editorship, contain many valuable documents relating to visitations of monasteries. The present writer is engaged upon an edition of similar documents from the Lincoln episcopal registers for the Lincoln Record Soc., of which vol.I(1420-36) is now in the press.

Three books of recent times are of the highest importance to students of monastic history, viz. (1) J. W. Clark'sObservances of Barnwell, already mentioned; (2)Inventories of Christ Church, Canterbury, ed. W. H. St John Hope and J. Wickham Legg, 1902; (3)The Rites of Durham, ed. J. T. Fowler, 1903 (Surt. Soc.), the notes to which are a mine of information as to monastic customs, ritual, etc.

D.English Monasteries: Architecture and Plan.There isa lack of general treatises on this subject; but the account of monastic architecture by C. Enlart,Manuel d'Archéologie française, Paris, 1904,II, 1-57, applies,mutatis mutandis, to English monasteries, and contains a general bibliography.

The foundation of the study of the Benedictine plan was laid down by Professor Willis in his articles onWorcester Cathedral and Monastery(Archaeol. Journal, vol.XX), and inThe Architectural History of the Conventual Buildings of the Monastery of Christ Church in Canterbury, 1869. D. J. Stewart'sArchitectural History of Ely Cathedral, 1868, is another remarkable work of the same period. Other important works are J. T. Micklethwaite'sNotes on the Abbey buildings of Westminster(Archaeol. Journal, vols.XXXIII,LI), W. H. St John Hope'sNotes on the Benedictine Abbey of St Peter at Gloucester(Ibid.vol.LIV) andArchitectural History of the Cathedral Church and Monastery of St Andrew at Rochester(reprinted fromArchaeol. Cantiana, 1900), the accounts of Peterborough abbey by C. R. Peers (Vict. Co. Hist. Northants, vol.II), of St Albans abbey by C. R. Peers and W. Page (Ibid.Herts, vol.II) and of Winchester cathedral priory by C. R. Peers and H. Brakspear (Ibid.Hants, vol.V), and W. H. Knowles'Tynemouth Priory(Archaeol. Journal, vol.LXVII). F. Bond'sWestminster Abbey, 1909, is an admirably written and well illustrated volume.

The Carthusian plan is treated by Mr Hope inMount Grace Priory(Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, vol.XVIII, with historical articles by H. V. le Bas and W. Brown) and inThe London Charterhouse and its old water supply(Archaeologia, vol.LVIII).

The peculiarities of the Cistercian order have received much attention: see E. Sharpe,Architecture of the Cistercians(Journal R.I.B.A., 1870-1, pp. 189-210), and J. T. Micklethwaite,Of the Cistercian plan(Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, vol.VII). The chief monograph on the Cistercian plan is W. H. St John Hope'sFountains Abbey(Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, vol.XV, reprinted separately, 1900), and to the same writer'sKirkstall Abbey(Thoresby Soc. Publications, vol.XVI) is added an essay by J. Bilson onThe Architecture of the Cistercians, reprinted, with some alterations, inArchaeol. Journal,vol.LXVI. It may be noted that Mr Hope, among other discoveries, established for the first time in hisFountains Abbeythe use of the Cistercian nave as the quire of theconversi, the arrangement of the Cistercian kitchen, and the fact of the disappearance of theconversifrom Cistercian houses after the middle of the fourteenth century. Mr Hope has further discussed Cistercian arrangements inThe Abbey of St Mary in Furness(Cumb. and Westm. Antiq. and Archaeol. Soc. Trans., vol.XVI, reprinted 1902), and with H. Brakspear inBeaulieu Abbey(Archaeol. Journal, vol.LXIII) andJervaulx Abbey(Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, vol.XXI). Mr Brakspear's monographs includeOn the first Church at Furness(Lanc. and Chesh. Antiq. Soc. Trans., vol.XVIII),The Church of Hayles Abbey(Archaeol. Journal, vol.LVIII; see alsoBristol and Glouc. Archaeol. Soc. Trans., vol.XXIV),Pipewell Abbey(Assoc. Archit. Soc. Reports, vol.XXX),Stanley Abbey(Wilts. Archaeol. Journal, vol.XXXV), andWaverley Abbey(Surrey Archaeol. Soc., 1905). See also R. W. Paul,The Church and Monastery of Abbey Dore(Bristol and Glouc. Archaeol. Soc. Trans., vol.XXVII).

For Cluniac plans see Mr Hope'sArchitectural History of the Priory of St Pancras at Lewes(Archaeol. Journal, vol.XLI; see alsoSussex Archaeol. Collections, vols.XXXIV,XLIX) andCastleacre Priory(Norfolk Archaeologia, vol.XII).

The chief monographs on houses of Augustinian canons are Mr Hope'sRepton Priory(Derby Archaeol. Soc. Trans., vols.VI,VII;Archaeol. Journal, vol.XLI), Messrs Hope and Brakspear'sHaughmond Abbey(Archaeol. Journal, vol.LXVI), and R. W. Paul'sPlan of the Church and Monastery of St Augustine, Bristol(Archaeologia, vol.LXIII). See also J. W. Clark,Observances of Barnwell, ut sup., C. C. Hodges,Hexham Abbey(sic), 1888, and the learned series of articles by J. F. Hodgson on the plans of Augustinian churches (Archaeol. Journal, vols.XLI-XLIII). Mr Brakspear has described two houses of Augustinian canonesses, viz.,Burnham Abbey(Ibid., vol.LX; seeBucks. Archit. and Archaeol. Soc. Records, vol.VIII) andLacock Abbey(Archaeologia, vol.LVII; see alsoWilts. Archaeol. Journal, vol.XXXI).

The Gilbertine plan is elucidated by Mr Hope inThe Gilbertine Priory of Watton(Archaeol. Journal, vol.LVIII).

Mr Hope is further responsible for a series of articles upon various Premonstratensian abbeys, viz. Alnwick (Archaeol. Journal, vol.XLIV; see alsoArchaeologia Aeliana, vol.XIII), Dale (Derby Archaeol. Soc. Trans., vols.I,II), St Agatha's (Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, vol.X), St Radegund's (Archaeol. Cantiana, vol.XIV), Shap (Cumb. and Westm. Antiq. and Archaeol. Soc. Trans., vol.X) and West Langdon (Archaeol. Cantiana, vol.XV). See also J. F. Hodgson,Eggleston Abbey(Yorks. Archaeol. Journal, vol.XVIII).

For the plans of friaries, see Mr Hope'sOn the Whitefriars or Carmelites of Hulne(Archaeol. Journal, vol.XLVII) and A. W. Clapham,On the Topography of the Dominican Priory of London(Archaeologia, vol.LXIII).

The above list embraces the most important contributions to the subject made during recent years. Many plans of other monasteries with brief descriptions will be found in the accounts of the summer meetings of the Royal Archaeological Institute in recent volumes of theArchaeol. Journal, and there are also plans of the chief monasteries in various volumes ofThe Builder. Mr Hope's plans of Durham are given inThe Rites of Durham, ut sup. For further plans, see the topographical sections of theVictoria County Historyand theHistory of Northumberland(now in progress).

Historical monographs on religious houses, in which attention is paid to plan and architectural features, should not be forgotten. As examples of these may be cited S. O. Addy'sBeauchief Abbey, Dr W. de Gray Birch's histories ofNeath AbbeyandMargam Abbey, C. Lynam'sCroxden Abbey, and S. W. Williams'Cistercian Abbey of Strata Florida. Guide-books are not as a rule very trustworthy, but the official guide-book to Tintern abbey, for the architectural part of which Mr Brakspear is responsible, and F. Bligh Bond's guide to Glastonbury abbey are among the notable exceptions.

Articles of great historical value will be found under various headings in Smith'sDictionary of Christian Antiquities, theEncyclopaedia Britannicaand theCatholic Encyclopaedia. It is unnecessary to refer to these in detail.

FOOTNOTES[1]Conversiwere found in houses of other orders, e.g. the Augustinian, but their position in such cases was less definite than in the Cistercian order. Maleconversiwere attached to houses of Cistercian nuns: examples of this are known in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire.[2]In 1301 the Benedictine monks of Gloucester were allowed a frock and cowl out of the wardrobe at least once a year, day-shoes once in 18 months, boots once in five years, pairs of woollen shirts (langelli) once every four years. They could change when necessary a thick and thin tunic, their pilch or fur cloak (pellicea), ordinary boots, under-shirt (stamen) and drawers (femoralia).[3]In 1230 the monks of St James', Bristol, a cell of Tewkesbury, petitioned the bishop of Worcester against the consecration of the Dominican church in St James' parish. Various documents in the York episcopal registers between 1279 and 1296 deal with the rivalry between thecustodesof the alien priory of Scarborough and the local Dominicans. In both cases the root of ill-feeling was the diversion by the friars of the oblations due to the parish altar.[4]Historical Growth of the English Parish Church, 1911, pp. 11-15.[5]At Waverley, late in the twelfth century, there were 70 monks, 120conversi. That the monks sometimes found theconversidifficult to manage is shewn by the action of abbot Richard (1220-35) at Meaux, who removed them from the granges and confined them to menial and craftsmen's work.[6]The order in which the parts of a monastery were built followed the immediate needs of the convent. Thus at Evesham the eastern part of the church and the eastern range of the cloister were built first: the frater and western range, with the permanent outer buildings and the rest of the church, were not finished till later. At Meaux a temporary two-storied building, church above and dorter below, was used for some years until permanent buildings were ready.[7]At St Albans, where we have much information about the library, two-thirds of the demesne tithes in Hatfield and some tithes in Redbourn were assigned between 1077 and 1098ad volumina ecclesiae(i.e. the church-books)facienda.[8]At Evesham two of the obedientiaries' checkers or offices were in the sub-vault of the dorter. Here also was the misericord, which had a door into the infirmary garden. The bleeding-house was a vaulted room beneath the rere-dorter.[9]Notices relating to water-supply are frequent in monastic chronicles. In 1216, when the old spring at Waverley dried up, a monk named Simon brought the waters of several springs by a culvert into a conduit which was called St Mary's fount. The new lavatory at Malmesbury was finished in 1284.[10]The weekly maundy (mandatum) or foot-washing took place at the lavatory; the arrangement is well seen at Fountains, where the monks sat on an upper ledge with their feet in the trough below.[11]The upper stage was probably the treasury, which the account of the flood of 1265 shews to have been on an upper floor.[12]In Benedictine houses the use of the misericord for monks in ordinary health was permitted at an earlier period. Abbot Colerne (1260-96) made regulations in 1292 for the daily use of the misericord at Malmesbury by a certain number of monks.[13]Jocelyn of Brakelond says that in bleeding-time 'monks are wont to open to one another the secrets of the heart and to take counsel together,' and describes how at such a time, in the vacancy before his election as abbot of Bury, Samson the sub-sacrist sat in silence, smiling at the gossip of the brethren.[14]Abbot Paul (1077-98) ordained that theminutiat St Albans, instead of feeding on meat pasties, should have a dish of salt-fish and slices of cake, known as 'karpie.'[15]At St Albans there was a largecamerafor infirm abbots close to the infirmary. This, known as thepictoriumor painted chamber, was destroyed by the insurgent tenants in 1381.[16]Abbot Brokehampton (1282-1316) built two guest-chambers at Evesham upon vaulted undercrofts on the west side of thecuria. In 1378 parliament sat in the guest-house and other buildings at Gloucester: the account shews how the cloister life was disorganised by the crowd of visitors.[17]This was due to the removal of a chantry of six monks and a secular priest from Ottringham to the monastery.[18]In Benedictine monasteries there were usually several offices outside the precinct—e.g., at Tewkesbury the mill and the guests' stable, burned in 1257, wereextra portam abbatiae. The building of permanent offices in thecuriaat Bury by abbot Samson is described by Jocelyn of Brakelond.[19]The almonry at St Albans, built by abbot Wallingford (1326-35), included a hall, chapel, chambers, kitchen, cellar and other buildings necessary for the scholars and their master.[20]The prior was usually nominated by the abbot, or the names of several nominees were submitted to the convent for election. Jocelyn of Brakelond gives a detailed account of the election of a prior at Bury.[21]The abbot's household at Gloucester, as regulated by archbishop Winchelsey in 1301, included five lay esquires and several lay servants, each with a definite office. Of the esquires one was seneschal of the guest-hall, another marshal, who was charged with regulating accounts, a third cook: the other two were appointed to serve the abbot's table and bed-chamber.[22]Thus the cellarer of Evesham supplied the frater daily with 72 loaves.[23]The officers and obedientiaries at Evesham in the thirteenth century were the prior, sub-prior, third prior and othercustodes ordinis, the precentor, dean of the Christianity of the vale of Evesham, sacrist, chamberlain, kitchener, two cellarers, infirmarer, almoner, warden of the vineyard and garden, master of the fabric, guest-master and pittancer. The last official distributed the money allowances of the brethren.

[1]Conversiwere found in houses of other orders, e.g. the Augustinian, but their position in such cases was less definite than in the Cistercian order. Maleconversiwere attached to houses of Cistercian nuns: examples of this are known in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire.

[2]In 1301 the Benedictine monks of Gloucester were allowed a frock and cowl out of the wardrobe at least once a year, day-shoes once in 18 months, boots once in five years, pairs of woollen shirts (langelli) once every four years. They could change when necessary a thick and thin tunic, their pilch or fur cloak (pellicea), ordinary boots, under-shirt (stamen) and drawers (femoralia).

[3]In 1230 the monks of St James', Bristol, a cell of Tewkesbury, petitioned the bishop of Worcester against the consecration of the Dominican church in St James' parish. Various documents in the York episcopal registers between 1279 and 1296 deal with the rivalry between thecustodesof the alien priory of Scarborough and the local Dominicans. In both cases the root of ill-feeling was the diversion by the friars of the oblations due to the parish altar.

[4]Historical Growth of the English Parish Church, 1911, pp. 11-15.

[5]At Waverley, late in the twelfth century, there were 70 monks, 120conversi. That the monks sometimes found theconversidifficult to manage is shewn by the action of abbot Richard (1220-35) at Meaux, who removed them from the granges and confined them to menial and craftsmen's work.

[6]The order in which the parts of a monastery were built followed the immediate needs of the convent. Thus at Evesham the eastern part of the church and the eastern range of the cloister were built first: the frater and western range, with the permanent outer buildings and the rest of the church, were not finished till later. At Meaux a temporary two-storied building, church above and dorter below, was used for some years until permanent buildings were ready.

[7]At St Albans, where we have much information about the library, two-thirds of the demesne tithes in Hatfield and some tithes in Redbourn were assigned between 1077 and 1098ad volumina ecclesiae(i.e. the church-books)facienda.

[8]At Evesham two of the obedientiaries' checkers or offices were in the sub-vault of the dorter. Here also was the misericord, which had a door into the infirmary garden. The bleeding-house was a vaulted room beneath the rere-dorter.

[9]Notices relating to water-supply are frequent in monastic chronicles. In 1216, when the old spring at Waverley dried up, a monk named Simon brought the waters of several springs by a culvert into a conduit which was called St Mary's fount. The new lavatory at Malmesbury was finished in 1284.

[10]The weekly maundy (mandatum) or foot-washing took place at the lavatory; the arrangement is well seen at Fountains, where the monks sat on an upper ledge with their feet in the trough below.

[11]The upper stage was probably the treasury, which the account of the flood of 1265 shews to have been on an upper floor.

[12]In Benedictine houses the use of the misericord for monks in ordinary health was permitted at an earlier period. Abbot Colerne (1260-96) made regulations in 1292 for the daily use of the misericord at Malmesbury by a certain number of monks.

[13]Jocelyn of Brakelond says that in bleeding-time 'monks are wont to open to one another the secrets of the heart and to take counsel together,' and describes how at such a time, in the vacancy before his election as abbot of Bury, Samson the sub-sacrist sat in silence, smiling at the gossip of the brethren.

[14]Abbot Paul (1077-98) ordained that theminutiat St Albans, instead of feeding on meat pasties, should have a dish of salt-fish and slices of cake, known as 'karpie.'

[15]At St Albans there was a largecamerafor infirm abbots close to the infirmary. This, known as thepictoriumor painted chamber, was destroyed by the insurgent tenants in 1381.

[16]Abbot Brokehampton (1282-1316) built two guest-chambers at Evesham upon vaulted undercrofts on the west side of thecuria. In 1378 parliament sat in the guest-house and other buildings at Gloucester: the account shews how the cloister life was disorganised by the crowd of visitors.

[17]This was due to the removal of a chantry of six monks and a secular priest from Ottringham to the monastery.

[18]In Benedictine monasteries there were usually several offices outside the precinct—e.g., at Tewkesbury the mill and the guests' stable, burned in 1257, wereextra portam abbatiae. The building of permanent offices in thecuriaat Bury by abbot Samson is described by Jocelyn of Brakelond.

[19]The almonry at St Albans, built by abbot Wallingford (1326-35), included a hall, chapel, chambers, kitchen, cellar and other buildings necessary for the scholars and their master.

[20]The prior was usually nominated by the abbot, or the names of several nominees were submitted to the convent for election. Jocelyn of Brakelond gives a detailed account of the election of a prior at Bury.

[21]The abbot's household at Gloucester, as regulated by archbishop Winchelsey in 1301, included five lay esquires and several lay servants, each with a definite office. Of the esquires one was seneschal of the guest-hall, another marshal, who was charged with regulating accounts, a third cook: the other two were appointed to serve the abbot's table and bed-chamber.

[22]Thus the cellarer of Evesham supplied the frater daily with 72 loaves.

[23]The officers and obedientiaries at Evesham in the thirteenth century were the prior, sub-prior, third prior and othercustodes ordinis, the precentor, dean of the Christianity of the vale of Evesham, sacrist, chamberlain, kitchener, two cellarers, infirmarer, almoner, warden of the vineyard and garden, master of the fabric, guest-master and pittancer. The last official distributed the money allowances of the brethren.

N.B. The name of each place in this list is followed by that of its county, or, if not in England, of its country, department or province. The description of the religious house as abbey or priory follows where necessary, and its order is added in brackets. Aug. = Augustinian; Ben. = Benedictine; Carm. = Carmelite; Carth. = Carthusian; Cist. = Cistercian; Clun. = Cluniac; Dom. = Dominican; Gilb. = Gilbertine; Prem. = Premonstratensian; Tiron. = Tironensian

Back to Index Next