Chapter 4

‘I see,’ he continues, ‘that any friar who is associated with me to help me in my various[221]and constant toil, will have to subordinate his ecclesiastical labours and apply himself continually to supplying my defects, and directing my goings, and supporting my burdens, though this might sometimes produce in him virtue and industry and endurance. Far be from me therefore such impious tyranny, as that I should be willing to see the great gifts and spiritual progress in the said friar stunted or retarded or thwarted by any consideration of private convenience; especially as I can through the Saviour’s pity, be provided, as I have heretofore been by your grace, with a competent companion without injury to the general welfare. I have also reason to think that Friar A., however great be his willingness and energy, will be unable without bodily suffering and mental disquietude to continue permanently with me, unless the stringent rules are relaxed inhis favour (nisi quatenus urgentia mitigat obedientiae salutaris diurnos aestus et vigilias nocturnas).‘... I ask therefore confidently, that you will, if it be not displeasing to your holy paternity, send to me without delay Friar Laurence de Sutthon, as mysocius, if he consents, and that you will send Friar A. to London to study, as he himself greatly desires, if it be your good pleasure. And though Friar Laurence suffer some tolerable defect, he is yet peculiarly fitted to help me, though vulgar obstinacy may not think so.’

‘... I ask therefore confidently, that you will, if it be not displeasing to your holy paternity, send to me without delay Friar Laurence de Sutthon, as mysocius, if he consents, and that you will send Friar A. to London to study, as he himself greatly desires, if it be your good pleasure. And though Friar Laurence suffer some tolerable defect, he is yet peculiarly fitted to help me, though vulgar obstinacy may not think so.’

The other letter[222]is also directed to the Provincial.

‘I am not a little surprised,’ he writes, ‘that through some excessive caution and severity, no provision has yet been made for the beloved Friar W. de Maddele, who has up to now diligently borne the burden of teaching (eruditionis impendendae), long since imposed on him. He is thus compelled, not only to exhaust the vital spirit by excessive studies, but also to wear out his bodily powers by writing every day with his own hand, though his strength is not the strength of stone, nor his flesh the flesh of brass. And while the other friars who have been deputed to the office of lecturing, especially those to whom he has succeeded, had great volumes and the assistance ofsociiprovided for them, he alone does not seem to be cared for; though I hear that he has a pleasant faculty of lecturing, is acute in arguing, and in writing and speaking useful and acceptable to both friars and seculars. It will therefore be for you, if you please, without delay to take thought for the peace of mind and provide for the advancement (provectui) of those who study.’

The position of thesociusprobably altered but little after this time. That of thelectorunderwent a change. The Franciscans assimilated their system of teaching to the system in vogue in the University generally: from the time of Adam Marsh the lecturers to the Franciscans were merely ordinary Regent Masters in theology belonging to the Order. This will be evident from a comparison of the dates at which the various lecturers, whose names have been preserved, held the office: a sufficient number of these dates has now been recovered, on the indisputable evidence of contemporary records, to put the matter beyond all doubt[223].

The appointment to the lectureship was in the hands of the Provincial Chapter[224]; practically the person recommended by the leadingbrethren at Oxford was elected[225]. This is true of the later as well as of the earlier lectors. No Minorite could proceed to any degree unless he were first authorised to do so by papal ordinance or by the election of his Order[226].

According to the Constitutions of Benedict XII, no Minorite might lecture on the Sentences in a University (i.e.become B.D.),

‘unless he had first lectured on the four books of the Sentences with the writings of the approved doctors in otherstudiawhich are in the same Order calledGeneralia,’

or in one of certain specified convents[227]. The friars of the English province were specially favoured in respect to the degree of D.D. It was decreed in the General Chapter at Rome in 1411

‘that no one shall be promoted to the degree of master, unless he first go to Paris, according to the papal statutes and the general institutes, and do all that he is bound to do,Provincia Angliae excepta[228].’

However, the Franciscans at Oxford never obtained the rightwhich was enjoyed by the Dominicans at Paris, of being the sole judges of the fitness of any friars of their own Order for academical degrees[229]. In the case of Adam Marsh, the term of office was one year[230]; and this was probably the general rule[231], though the readers might perhaps be re-elected in the annual Provincial Chapter[232]. They often remained at Oxford after the expiry of their year[233], and no doubt continued to lecture, though they ceased to beex officiorepresentatives of the friars in their dealings with the University or other bodies.

Even in the earliest times it was found necessary to modify the stringency of the rule in favour of the lecturers. Visiting and good works were subordinated to their scholastic duties[234]. They were provided with more ample accommodation than the other friars, and their privacy was at certain times inviolable[235]. In the Constitutions of Benedict XII (1337) regulations for their support are given with some detail[236]. Masters, lectors, and bachelors in Universities were to be provided with the necessaries of life by the convents of the places where they lectured. But their other expenses, such as those connected with the necessary books, were to be assessed by the General or Provincial Minister and to fall on the convent from which they were sent; or, if the convent was unable to ‘procure’ the funds, these were to be supplied by the custody or province in which the native convent of the lecturer was situated. In addition to this, seculars and members of other religious Orders who attended the lectures, would no doubt have to pay fees[237].

We may reasonably infer that Grostete practised in the Franciscan school the system of instruction in theology which he subsequently recommended to the University. When consulted by the latter, he answered that the Regent Masters in theology ought to take the Old and New Testaments as the only sure foundations of their teaching and make them the subject of all their morning lectures, according tothe custom of the Doctors of Paris[238]. Roger Bacon laments the exaggerated respect which was paid to the ‘Sentences’ in his day, and points out that

‘the learned men of old, some of whom we have seen, such as Robert bishop of Lincoln and Friar Adam de Marisco, used only the text’ which was ‘given to the world from the mouth of God and of the Saints[239].’

At the Friary, as in the rest of the University, much of the teaching in the theological faculty was, even in the thirteenth century, done by bachelors[240]; the admission to the degree of B.D. was accompanied by a licence to ‘lecture on the book of the Sentences.’ Some of the lectures would probably be for the brethren alone; others were open to the University[241]. The latter would certainly be the case when a friar delivered the lectures, which he was bound to give as ‘Necessary Regent,’ in his monastery. These courses seem however to have been sometimes delivered in the University Schools in School Street[242].

The academic studies of the friars were confined to the faculty of theology (in its wide mediaeval sense), and of canon law, the ‘handmaid’ of theology. The regulars were for the most part subject to the same statutes as the secular students in these faculties, with some important modifications.

The rules of the two Orders forbade their members to take a degree in Arts[243]. The customs of the University, on the other hand, requiredthat the student of theology should have graduated in Arts[244]. The issue was definitely raised in 1253[245], and we have from the pen of Adam Marsh a detailed account of the struggle[246]. In February the Chancellor and Masters of the University were formally petitioned to allow Friar Thomas of York,

‘a man of high repute among the great and the many, on account of the eminence of his character, ability, learning, and experience, to ascend the chair of ordinary regent in Holy Scripture.’

The objection was then raised that he had not ruled in Arts. A committee of seven was appointed by the Masters to prepare a report, and the deliberations lasted, with a short interval, the whole of the next fortnight (Feb. 22 to March 8). On Saturday, March 8, ‘the chancellor and masters and some bachelors’ assembled to consider the report, which was to the effect that Friar Thomas should incept this time, but that a statute should be passed providing that for the future no one should incept in theology unless he had previously ruled in Arts in some University, and read one book of the Canon (of the Bible) or of the Sentences, and publicly preached in the University; the Chancellor and Masters reserved to themselves the right of granting dispensations, but provided against the use of undue influence of powerful patrons in procuring such ‘graces’ by the clause:

‘but if any one shall attempt to extort a grace from the University through the influence of any magnate, he shallipso factobe expelled from the society of the Masters and deprived of the privileges of the University[247].’

The report was at once accepted as the basis of a statute, to be signed by

‘the Chancellor and all the regent masters in theology, and Friar Hugh of Mistretune, and the other regent masters in decrees and laws, and the two rectors (proctors) for the artists, and Friar Adam called de Marisco[248].’

Adam however refused to sign, and the meeting was prorogued till the next day, the first Sunday in Lent, only to be postponed again till Monday, when Adam, ‘in the presence of the chancellor, masters, and scholars,’ repeated his objections, adding others. He could not, heargued, agree to a statute of which he disapproved, merely to gain his immediate point. The promised ‘graces’ were fallacious,

‘since by the opposition of any one man such a grace could be long delayed or altogether prevented; thus even the best men would be rejected, and he who was approved by divinity would be reproved by inhumanity.’

Further, it was unreasonable to require his signature, seeing that he was now almost a stranger (quasi foras factus), having for three years retired from the office of lecturing in their University. At length he formally washed his hands of the whole matter, withdrawing even his opposition,

‘since the measure, dangerous as it was and distasteful to him, did not seem to him to be conceived in a spirit of wilful injustice,’ (non videtur secundum planum sui praeferre iniquitatem).

He then left the assembly, while the seven commissioners withdrew to decide on the terms of the statute, which was merely a recapitulation of the original report. The Chancellor at once sent Adam the final decision, ‘written with his own hand,’ which the latter duly forwarded to the Provincial Minister. He left Oxford on Wednesday, the very day on which the statute was passed, while Thomas of York celebrated his ‘vesperies’ on Thursday and his inception on Friday, under the presidency of Friar Peter de Manners. In view of the bitterness which marked both the contemporary struggle between the University and Mendicants at Paris, and the disputes between the University and Dominicans at Oxford sixty years later, it is impossible not to be struck with the good feeling and moderation displayed both by Adam and his opponents.

The controversy at the beginning of the fourteenth century was to a large extent the sequel to the events we have just related[249]. The Dominicans in 1311 appealed first to the King, and when this proved of no avail, to the Pope, complaining that graces were frequently refused to fit candidates, and demanding the repeal of the statute of 1253. The appeal was read in the church of the Minorites,

‘in the presence of a vast multitude of people there assembled on the occasion of a public sermon to the clerks,’

but the Franciscans took no active part in the matter, and the details of the struggle belong to the history of the Black Friars. The otherMendicant Orders however were no doubt involved in the odium which attached to the conduct of the Dominicans, and from this time forth the jealous feeling between the friars and the University never died out.

The issue of the controversy concerned the Franciscans no less than the Preaching Friars. In 1314 the arbitrators to whom the matter had been submitted published their award[250]. The statute of 1253 was upheld, but the right of refusing to any one, who had not ruled in Arts, the grace to incept in theology, was practically withdrawn from each individual member of Congregation and vested in the Regent Masters of the Theological Faculty.

‘On such a grace being asked, every Master shall be bound to swear on the gospels ... that he will not refuse such grace out of malice, hatred or rancour, but only for the common utility and honour of the university. And if notwithstanding this oath such grace be refused by any one, the reason of the refusal shall at once be set forth in the same Congregation of Masters in the presence of the Chancellor and proctors of the university and the Masters ruling in Theology, and within ten days or less it shall be discussed for the decision of the university whether that reason be sufficient or not. And if the reason of the aforesaid refusal be sufficient in the judgment of the Masters then ruling in Theology or of the majority of them, the refusal of the grace shall hold good; but if the reason of the refusal be insufficient in the judgment of the same persons,eo ipsothe grace shall be granted[251].’

The Dominicans however hoped with the Pope’s assistance[252]to get more favourable terms, and it was not till 1320 that they finally submitted to the University[253]. The wording of the award was certainly vague and required explanation. What, for instance, was the meaning of the expression, ‘the common utility and honour of the university’? It is probably to this period that the following decree is to be referred, and it may be regarded as a gloss on the award of 1314[254]:—

‘Item, quod nullus de cetero, nisi prius in artibus rexerit, in disputationesolemni alicujus doctoris in theologia, publice opponere permittatur, nisi prius coram Cancellario et Procuratoribus Universitatis juramentum praestiterit corporale, quod philosophiam per octo annos, solis philosophicis principaliter intendendo, et postea theologiam per sex annos completos ad minus audierit, seu partim audierit et partim legerit, per spatium temporis supradicti: ad fidelem vero hujus statuti conservationem, noverint doctores in theologia Regentes se fore specialiter obligatos.’

The award of 1314 remained the permanent law of the University, and for the next century the friars confined themselves to insisting on the due execution of its provisions. In 1388, Richard II, hearing that,

‘contrary to the decision of the aforesaid declaration you maliciously prevent the friars from taking degrees in theology,’

wrote two strongly worded letters to the Chancellor, Proctors, and Regent Masters of the University, ordering them, ‘under pain of our heavy displeasure,’ to observe the statute of 1314[255]. In 1421, in consideration of remonstrances from the King and the Archbishop of Canterbury, the University gave a solemn undertaking to carry out the same statute, with some changes in detail[256]. So long however as the condition, that the candidate must have ruled in Arts, was inserted in the ‘form of licensing to incept in theology[257],’ the religious felt themselves to be at a disadvantage in comparison with the seculars, and bitterly resented their inferiority. When therefore, in 1447, the University was raising funds for the erection of the new schools, the Mendicants seized the opportunity to secure the abolition of this clause, promising in return that each friar should pay 40s.to the University at the time of receiving the licence[258]. This may however have been only a temporary arrangement: the Registers of Congregation supply little evidence as to its having been carried out[259].

The object of these statutes was partly to prevent the regulars from having an undue advantage over the seculars in the matter of theological degrees, but they must have had the effect of ensuring to the friars some preliminary training before the commencement of theirtheological studies. Roger Bacon, as usual, has a decided opinion on the necessity of such a training. Writing in 1271[260], he says:—

‘During the last forty years there have arisen some in the Universities (in studio) who have made themselves doctors and masters of theology and philosophy, though they have never learnt anything of real value (dignum) and are neither willing nor able to do so on account of their ‘status.’... They are boys inexperienced in themselves, in the world, in the learned languages, Greek and Hebrew; ... they are ignorant of all parts and sciences of mundane philosophy, when they venture on the study of theology, which demands all human wisdom.... They are the boys of the two student Orders, like Albert and Thomas and others, who enter the Orders when they are twenty years old or less.... Many thousands enter who cannot read the Psalter or Donatus, and immediately after making their profession, they are set to study theology.... And so it was right that they should make no progress, especially when they did not procure instruction for themselves in philosophy from others after they entered the Order. And most of all because they have presumed in the Orders to investigate philosophy by themselves without a teacher—so that they have become masters in theology and philosophy before they were disciples—therefore infinite error reigns among them.’

The Oxford friars however could not have acquired their great scholastic reputation unless they had been better fitted than the seculars for the study of theology; and Friar William Woodford had little difficulty in pointing to many who, having entered the Order in their youth,

‘wrote many works of great wisdom, which remain for the advantage of the Church[261].’

The clause of the statute of 1253 which prohibited the extortion of graces or dispensations by means of the letters of influential persons was not altogether effective. When, in 1358, the bitter feeling against the friars found a spokesman in Richard Fitzralph and again burst forth into open hostility, the clause was re-enacted in a more stringent form[262]. Any one using such letters was declared for ever incapable of holding or obtaining any degree at Oxford, and the University determined to hold up these ‘wax-doctors’ to obloquy.

‘These,’ begins a proclamation of the same year[263], ‘are the names of the wax-doctors, as they are called who seek to extort graces from the University by means of letters of lords sealed with wax, or because they run from hard study as wax runs from the face of fire. Be it known that such wax-doctors are always of the Mendicant Orders, the cause whereofwe have found[264]; for by apples and drink, as the people fables, they draw boys to their religion, and do not instruct them after their profession, as their age demands, but let them wander about begging, and waste the time when they could learn, in currying favour with lords and ladies.... These are their names: Friar Richard Lymynster incepted in theology by means of the prince’s letters, and his grace contained the condition that he should incept and not lecture, but that Friar John Nutone his predecessor should continue lecturing[265]: and Friar Giuliortus de Limosano of the Order of Minors, who asserted that he was secretary of the King of Sicily, extorted from the University, or rather from the theological faculty, by letters of the King, grace to oppose.’

These instances hardly seem to justify the violent language of the proclamation, and it is uncertain to what extent the Oxford Minorites were guilty of the practice here denounced. Wiclif repeats the charge against the Mendicants generally:—

‘A what cursedness is this, to a dead man, as to the world, and pride and vanitie thereof, to get him a cap of masterdom by praier of Lords[266]!’

It remains for us to give an account of the academic, or rather scholastic career of a Friar Minor at Oxford. As many of the friars entered the Order in tender years, there is no doubt that boys’ schools formed part of many of the friaries[267]. There is no evidence of such a school at Oxford, but at Paris one existed where the student friars received a preliminary education[268]. It is probable that the names of friars who showed ability were sent up by the various convents to the Provincial Chapter and that a certain number were elected by the ‘discreet men’ there assembled to go to the University[269]. There is no evidence of any definite rule fixing the number or proportion of friars who might be sent from each convent, custody, or province, to Oxford[270]. The average number of friars living in the convent at Oxford at any time during the last quarter of the thirteenth and thefirst half of the fourteenth century was probably between seventy and eighty[271].

A friar usually completed his eight years’ study of Arts, and often began his course of theology[272], at his native convent. On coming up to Oxford he at once entered on or continued his theological studies. A secular student of Divinity during his first three years attended ‘cursory’ lectures on the Bible and was admitted to oppose after the end of the fourth year[273]. In the friaries the course of study would in the main correspond with that adopted by the University. After six years[274](instead of four) spent chiefly in the study of the Bible, a friar was presented by his teacher, a Regent Master of the same Order[275], tothe Chancellor and Proctors; special enquiry was then made as to his knowledge of the liberal arts, his age, morals, and stature; and if he satisfied the University officers on these points, he was admitted to ‘oppose in theology[276].’ Two more years elapsed before he could become a ‘respondent[277].’ Opposition or opponency and responsion were the two sides of a disputation: some question in theology was proposed, probably by the Master of the Schools; the opponent took one side (affirmative or negative) andputhis case; the respondent then had to take the other side. The difficulty of the respondent’s task was probably augmented by his having to answer the arguments of more than one opponent[278]. These regulations however were apparently superseded in 1358, when it was enacted that no religious who had not ruled in Arts should presume to read the Sentences until he had opposed duly and publicly a whole year in the ordinary disputations of the Masters, no other person of the same Order opposing at the same time[279]. This appears to have been the theory, and to some extent the practice, during the times about which we have any detailed information—i.e. the period covered by the early Registers. In none of the supplications and graces of the Minorites is there mention of the lapse of two years or anything approaching it between opponency and responsion; the latter exercise indeed is usually coupled with opponency, and treated as a very secondary affair[280]. A few instances will be sufficient as illustrations. In 1515 a grace was granted to Friar W. German, scholar of theology, with the stipulation that half a year should elapse between his opposition and responsion; the condition was subsequently withdrawn at German’s request[281]. In 1457, Friar Gonsalvo of Portugal supplicated that he might count two terms of opponency as a year[282]; Richard Ednam in 1455 was allowed to count eight oppositionspro completa forma oppositionis[283]. Friar John Smith was admitted B.D. six months after he was admitted to oppose[284]. The opponent had to dispute in each of the Schools of the Masters intheology[285]; towards the end of our period, oppositions were held in the new Schools of theology[286].

After nine years spent in theological study, the friar might be admitted to read theSentencesof Peter Lombard publicly in the Schools[287], that is, to take the degree of B.D. On the presentation of the candidate to the Chancellor and Proctors, one at least of the Regents in theology must swear that heknewhim to be a fit person in morals and learning, the other Regents, that theybelievedhim to be such[288]. Within a year from this time[289], the new Bachelor had to begin his lectures on theSentences, which he continued for a year (three terms), reading the text on most of the ‘legible’ days of each term, with questions or arguments pertinent to the matter, giving the accepted interpretation. He was not to raise doubtful points or attack the conclusions of another, more than once a term, except at the first and last lectures on each book of theSentences[290]. In the first year also, he had to preach an examinatory sermon, which before 1303 was usually held at the Black or Grey Friars, after that date at St. Mary’s[291]; another Latin sermon, ‘qui non sit examinatorius’ at St. Mary’s[292]; and a third, before his inception, in the Dominican church, according to the statute of 1314[293]. In the next two years he had to continue his studies, and perhaps lecture on a book of the canon of the Bible[294]: the lecturing in this case was apparently to be donebiblice; i.e. without commenting or discussing questions, except only on the text (quaestiones ... literales)[295]. Further, after the lapse of a year from the conclusionof his lectures on the Sentences, he had to respond to eight Regents in theology separately (or to all if there were less than eight); all or most of these responsions were to be ‘ordinary,’ or at least ‘concursive’ (concursivae), and responsions at vesperies and inceptions were included in the eight[296]. Whether the rest of these responsions took place at the terminal disputations in the Theology School is not quite clear; but a later statute (1583) provides that none of these terminal disputations shall count to any one ‘pro forma[297].’ The responsions were latterly held in the new schools: before these were built, in the schools of the various Masters. The Bachelor had then completed the studies necessary for the degree of S.T.P. or D.D.

These exercises seem usually to have been insisted on, more or less fully, even in the century before the Reformation. Friar John Sunday in 1454, having finished his lectures on the Sentences, supplicated for leave to incept after responding to each of the doctors and completing his course on the Bible: the grace was conceded on condition that he should respond and oppose eight times ‘pro forma,’ and respond twice ‘preter formam[298].’ Friar Thomas Anyden, S.T.B., supplicated (1507) that three responsions in the new schools with an examinatory sermon and ‘introitus’ of the Bible should suffice that he should be admitted to incept[299]. It was rarely that three years intervened before the admission to read the Sentences and inception[300]. Thus Friar Gilbert Saunders was admitted to oppose in Nov. 1511, and incepted in July 1513[301]. Friar John Smyth was admitted B.D. in Dec. 1512, and D.D. in July 1513[302]. Another of the same name however was allowed to incept in 1507 if he had spent four years in the study of theology after taking the bachelor’s degree[303].

We now come to the exercises and ceremonies connected with inception. First the grace had to be asked of Congregation; there was no fixed time for doing this[304]. Secondly came the ‘deponing,’ which was done by all the regent masters in the faculty present; all of themhad to swear that theyknewthe candidate to be a fit person; he must be of good life and honest conversation and not deformed in body (corpore vitiati)[305]. He then received in the ordinary form the Chancellor’s licence to incept, after swearing to observe the statutes of the University and to incept within a year of his admission[306].

On the day preceding the day fixed for his ‘vesperies,’ the licentiate sent to each Master of Theology and requested him to attend the latter ceremony[307]. Theological vesperies were in the thirteenth century held in the various schools; a Franciscan celebrated his vesperies in the school or church of the convent under the presidency of his own master[308]. At the beginning of the fourteenth century, a statute was passed enacting that every inceptor in theology should celebrate his vesperies in St. Mary’s Church[309]. It does not seem that the masters in the faculty were bound to attend[310], but the prospect of an important or exciting discussion often attracted a large audience[311]. The exercises at vesperies consisted of disputations on theological questions proposed probably by the candidate[312], and announced to Congregation. All the masters present both at vesperies and at the Act had the right to bring forward their arguments in turn[313]. Thus Friar Hugh of Hertepol (c. 1280-1290) disputed ‘in the vesperies before the inception of Friar John de Persole at Oxford[314].’ About the same time ‘Sneyt (debated) a question in the vesperies of Robert de Bromyard; Thomas of Malmesbury, preacher, responded[315].’ The proceedings were terminated by a speech delivered by the presiding master in praise of the inceptor[316]. Grostete is said to have presided and given the oration at the vesperies of Adam Marsh[317].

Inception followed the next day. Even this ceremony in the thirteenthcentury took place sometimes in the churches of the friars[318]; but at the beginning of the fourteenth century, it was certainly the custom to hold the Act in St. Mary’s[319]. The inceptor was admitted into the gild of Masters by one of the Masters (not the Chancellor), who was called the Father[320]. In the case of a Franciscan, the Father would usually, though not always, be a doctor of the same Order[321]. Those about to incept first read their lectures, then opened a discussion on certain questions[322]. In later times the exercises consisted of the discussion by all the inceptors, as opponents, of three questions proposed by the respondent and sanctioned by Congregation; the respondent, while statutably a D.D., was usually some M.A. or B.D. who was allowed to count this responsionpro forma[323]. In the more vigorous days of scholasticism, it is probable that the disputation was more of a reality—that the inceptor (who took the part of opponent) chose his own subjects[324]and was answered by a rival among the doctors[325].

Many of the questions discussed at vesperies, inceptions, and other disputations at Oxford at the end of the thirteenth century—probably in the convent of the Minorites—are preserved in a manuscript at Assisi[326]. The question on which Friar Hugh of Hertepol disputed at the vesperies of Friar John de Persole was:An Christus in primo instanti potuit mereri perfectione. Other questions of the same Friar Hugh were:An deus eadem ratione formali videatur trinus et unus,An incarnacio sit possibilis. The following are also among the questions in the same volume:Utrum deus sit infinite potencie,Utrum virgo concepit sine semine,An intellectus sit forma corporis,An deus sit in omnibus rebus,An omnes beati equaliter participant beatitudine,An ratio ymaginis est in actuali visione dei.

We may next enquire how far the statutable requirements as to theperiod of study were carried out: the only evidence obtainable is from the registers, which begin about 1450. The statutes, as we have seen, required that a religious should have studied Arts (i.e. philosophy) and Theology for fourteen years before opponency. The periods mentioned in the supplications vary from sixteen to eight years, the most usual number of years being twelve. Before inception, six more years of study were demanded, i.e. twenty in all. The period in the supplications varies from fourteen to twenty years; the usual number is eighteen. There is however reason to believe that these figures are not very exact. We have no means of checking them with regard to opponency, and the University was probably in the same position. But it frequently happened, that a friar, who had been admitted to oppose on the ground of having studied ‘logic, philosophy and theology’ for twelve years, supplicated two years later or less for grace to incept on the plea that he had studied the same subjects for eighteen years[327].

The expenses at inception were very heavy. Thereligiosiwore their usual habit[328], and Mendicants were exempted from the payment of ‘commons’ to the University[329]. Further, when several inmates of the same convent incepted on the same day, the charges (fees to the bedells and others?) were the same as for one inceptor[330]. But these details did not touch the largest expenses. According to ancient custom, every inceptor on the day of his inception feasted the Regent Masters (apparently of all faculties)[331], and Wiclif inveighs against the Mendicant Doctors for their

Back to Index Next