GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD

Oxford
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

THE
GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD

PART I
A HISTORY OF THE CONVENT

PART II
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF THE FRIARS

TOGETHER WITH
APPENDICES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS

BY
ANDREW G. LITTLE, M.A.
BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD

Oxford
PRINTED FOR THE OXFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1892
[All rights reserved]

[Pg v]

PREFACE.

The object of this work is to give an account of the outward life of the Franciscans. This might be fairly taken to include the whole activity of the friars with the exception of their contribution to scholastic philosophy; for that clearly forms a subject by itself. But even with this limitation the account here given of the Franciscans’ work does not pretend to be complete. The documents which remain to us do not by any means cover the whole of the active life of the Franciscans. While for the thirteenth century and the Dissolution the records are fairly numerous, the materials for the intervening period are very scanty. Thus any attempt at a chronological narrative was out of the question. And the almost total absence of all Franciscan records (properly so called) in England, has proved an effectual bar to any completeness of treatment at all. The arrangement here adopted, both in the choice of subjects and in the relative prominence given to each of them, is due simply to the exigencies of the available materials relating to the Oxford Convent. The topographical information derived from records and other sources has been neither full enough nor accurate enough to enable me to supply a map or plan of the property and buildings of the Grey Friars.

A few words will be necessary to explain the plan pursued in Part II. An endeavour has been made to collect the names of all the Grey Friars who lived in the Convent at Oxford or who studied in the University: the list, if complete, would have[Pg vi] included all the names which were, or ought to have been, entered in the ‘Buttery-books’ or ‘Admission-books’ of the house. To show how far short of this aim the result falls, it is only necessary to point out that the names of friars actually included in Part II number little more than three hundred: and the connexion of some of these with Oxford is doubtful. The bibliographies, appended to the biographical notices, are intended to include all the extant works of each friar, but not all the MSS. nor all the editions of each work. Occasionally works are added which have not been identified, but of whose previous existence there is sufficient evidence. For this part of the book I have used, besides the well-known mediaeval bibliographies, a number of catalogues of manuscripts; a list of these is given below, with the object of showing not so much what has been done, as what has been left undone.

Among unpublished sources, the most valuable have been various collections in the Public Record Office, especially the Patent, Close, and Liberate Rolls; the Registers of Congregation (Reg. A a, G 6, H 7, I 8), the records of the Chancellor’s Court (Acta Curiae Cancellarii , , EEE, or ), and Brian Twyne’s collections, in the Oxford University Archives. Further, I have had occasion to consult the Oxford City Archives, some of the old registers of wills at Somerset House, and various manuscripts in the British Museum, Lambeth Palace, and Gray’s Inn; the Bodleian and several College libraries at Oxford; the University (or Public) Library and several College libraries at Cambridge; the library of Sir Thomas Phillipps at Thirlestaine House, Cheltenham; the National Library at Paris, and the Municipal Library at Assisi. I have had no opportunity of examining the episcopal registers of the diocese of Lincoln, extracts from which, however, are contained in Twyne’s transcripts.

The Index, so far as it deals with the names of persons and places, will, I hope, be found complete, with the following[Pg vii] limitations. The authorities quoted, either in the text or in the notes, the places where the manuscripts cited were written, or were formerly or are now kept, or where the editions referred to were printed, are not mentioned in the Index, unless there is some particular reason for including them. So far as it deals with subjects, the Index is meant to be supplementary to the Table of Contents. The writings of the friars are not classified in the Index, except those which come under the headings Aristotle, Bible, Evangelical Poverty and Sentences.

Finally, I wish to express my thanks to those who have given me aid, namely, to the Rev. W. G. D. Fletcher, Vicar of St. Michael’s, Shrewsbury, author of ‘The Black Friars in Oxford,’ who generously placed a valuable collection of references at my disposal; to Mr. Falconer Madan for assistance and advice; to the Keeper of the University Archives and the Town Clerk of Oxford for allowing me free and repeated access to the documents under their respective charges; and to the authorities in the various offices and libraries in which I have worked, for their unfailing courtesy.

ANDREW G. LITTLE.

30 November, 1891.

[Pg viii]

CATALOGUES OF MANUSCRIPTS CONSULTED.

For the compilation of the bibliographies in Part II the following catalogues of manuscripts have been consulted[1]:—

Bernard de Montfaucon, Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum Manuscriptorum; Paris, 1739, 2 vols. fol.

Haenel, Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum qui in Bibliothecis Galliae, Helvetiae, Belgii, Britanniae M., Hispaniae, Lusitaniae, asservantur; Lipsiae, 1830.

Edward Bernard, Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum Angliae et Hiberniae in unum collecti; Oxon., 1697, 2 vols., fol. Vol. I, Bodleian; Oxford Colleges; Cambridge Colleges and Public (University) Library. Vol. II, Cathedral and other libraries in England; Irish libraries.

Catalogues of the following collections in the British Museum:—Royal MSS. 1734, 4to (Casley); Sloane and Birch, 1782, 2 vols. 4to (Ayscough); Cotton, 1802, fol.; Harley, 1808-1812, 4 vols., fol.; Lansdowne, 2 parts, 1819, fol.; Arundel and Burney, 1834-40, fol.; Additional MSS. from A. D. 1783-1887.

A Catalogue of the Archiepiscopal MSS. in the Library at Lambeth Palace, by H. J. Todd; 1812, fol.

Ancient MSS. in Gray’s Inn Library, 1869.

Catalogues of the following collections in the Bodleian:—Laudian MSS., 1858-1885; Canonician MSS., 1854; Tanner MSS., 1860; Rawlinson, 1862-1878; Digby, 1883; Catalogue of the Ashmolean MSS., 1845-1866.

Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum qui in Collegiis Aulisque Oxoniensibus hodie adservantur (Coxe); Oxon., 1852, 2 vols., 4to.

A Catalogue of the Manuscripts preserved in the Library of the University of Cambridge, edited for the Syndics of the University Press; Cambridge, 1856, &c., 6 vols., 8vo.

Nasmith, Catalogue of the Parker MSS. in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; 1787, 4to.

Catalogue of MSS. in the library of Gonville and Caius, by J. J. Smith; 1849, 4to.

Catalogus Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae Parisiensis; Paris, 1739-1744, 4 vols., fol.

[Pg ix]Inventaire des Manuscrits conservés à la Bibliothèque Impériale sous les Nos. 8823-18613, du Fonds Latin et faisant suite à la série dont le Catalogue a été publié en 1744 par Léopold Delisle; Paris, 1863, &c., 8vo.

Inventaire des MSS. de la Bibliothèque Nationale, Fonds de Cluni, par L. Delisle.

Catalogue général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques des Départements; Paris, 1849-1885, 7 vols., 4to.

Catalogue général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques de France; (α) Paris: (1) Bibliothèque Mazarine, by A. Molinier, 3 vols. 8vo.; (2) Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, by H. Martin, 1885, &c. (vols. 1 and 2 contain the Latin MSS.). (β) Départements, vols. 1-12, 1886-1889.

Catalogue des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Publique de Bruges (P. J. Laude), Bruges, 1859, 8vo.

Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae Monacensis, Cod. Lat. vols. 1 and 2[2]; Monachii 1868-1874.

Katalog der Handschriften der königl. öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden; Leipzig, 1882-3, 2 vols., 8vo.

Tabulae Codicum Manuscriptorum praeter Graecos et Orientales in Bibliotheca Palatina Vindobonensi asservatorum; Vienna, 1864-1875, 7 vols., 8vo. (Codices 1-14,000).

Catalogus Codicum Latinorum Bibliothecae Mediceae Laurentianae (Bandini), 1774, 5 vols., folio.

Bibliotheca Leopoldina Laurentiana (Bandini); Florence, 1791, 3 vols., folio.

Bibliotheca Manuscripta ad S. Marci Venetiarum (Valentinelli); Venet. 1868-1873, 6 vols., 8vo.

Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Codices Palatini Latini, tom. I, codices 1-921; 1886.

Bibliothecae Patavinae Manuscriptae publicae et privatae opera Jacobi Philippi Tomasini; Utini, 1639, 4to. (Tomasin).

Bibliothecae Venetae Manuscriptae publicae et privatae opera Jacobi Philippi Tomasini; Utini, 1650, 4to. (Tomasin).

[Pg x]

ABBREVIATIONS AND EDITIONS USED.

Anal. Franc. = Analacta Franciscana, sive chronica aliaque varia documenta ad historiam Fratrum Minorum spectantia, edita a Patribus Collegii S. Bonaventurae, Quaracchi, 1885-7, 2 vols.

Archiv f. L. u. K. Gesch. = Archiv für Literatur- und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters, herausgegeben von H. Denifle und F. Ehrle.

Bale, Script. = Illustrium Majoris Britanniae Scriptorum ... Summarium, 1559, 2 vols.

B. of Pisa = Bartholomew of Pisa, Liber Conformitatum, ed. Milan, 1510.

Bernard = Catalogi Librorum MSS. Angliae et Hiberniae, Oxon., 1697.

Burnet, Reformation = History of the Reformation of the Church of England, Oxford, 1829.

Foxe = The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe, edited by Cattley, 1841.

Hist. Litt. = Histoire Littéraire de la France (by the Benedictines of St. Maur, and the Members of the Institute), 1733-1873.

Lyte = Maxwell Lyte, History of the University of Oxford, 1886.

Montfaucon = B. Montfaucon, Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum MSS., &c.

P.C.C. = Prerogative Court of Canterbury, Wills proved in the, now at Somerset House.

Q. R. Misc. = Queen’s Remembrancer, Miscellaneous Accounts, now in the Public Record Office.

Q. R. Wardrobe = Queen’s Remembrancer, Wardrobe Accounts, now in the Public Record Office.

R.O. = Public Record Office.

R.S. = Rolls Series, or Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages, published under the direction of the Master of the Rolls.

Tomasin = Bibliotheca Patavinae MSS., and Bibliothecae Venetae MSS. &c. (see above).

Wadding = L. Wadding, Annales Minorum, Romae, 1731, &c.

Wadding, Script. = L. Wadding, Scriptores Ordinis Minorum, Romae, 1806.

Wadding, Sup. ad Script. = Supplementum et castigatio ad Scriptores trium Ordinum S. Francisci a Waddingo aliisve descriptos ... opus posthumum Fr. Jo. Hyacinthi Sbaraleae, Romae, 1806.

Wood-Clark = Survey of the Antiquities of the City of Oxford, by Anthony Wood, edited by Andrew Clark, 1889-1890. [The MS. from which this edition is printed is often referred to in the following pages, namely ‘Wood MS. F. 29 a’ in the Bodleian.]

[Pg xi]

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

CORRIGENDA.

[Pg 1]

THE GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD.

PART I.

HISTORY OF THE CONVENT, A. D. 1224-1538.

CHAPTER I.

EARLY YEARS.

The Franciscans first arrived in England in 1224[3]. On Tuesday, the 10th of September in that year (to follow the account of Friar Thomas Eccleston, the earliest historian of the Order in this country),[Pg 2] a company of nine friars, four of them clerks and five laymen, landed at Dover, under the leadership of Agnellus of Pisa, the first Provincial Minister. After staying two days at Canterbury, four of them proceeded to London; and at the end of the month, two of these, Friar Richard of Ingeworth and Friar Richard of Devon, set out for Oxford. It is perhaps to this place that the well-known story told by Bartholomew of Pisa properly belongs[4]. As they neared Oxford they were stopped by the floods, and finding themselves at nightfall ‘in a vast wood which lies between Bath and Oxford,’ they sought refuge ‘for the love of God’ at a grange belonging to the monks of Abingdon, ‘lest they should perish from hunger or the wild beasts in the forest.’ The prior, judging them to be jesters[5], had them turned out; but a young monk, when the rest had gone to bed, put them into a hayloft and brought them bread and beer. That night he had a dream. The prior and his brethren were summoned before the judgment-seat of Christ; and

In the morning the young monk found his companions dead, and became an early convert to the order of St. Francis.

On their arrival at Oxford, the two friars were received with great kindness by the Dominicans.

They then hired a house in the parish of St. Ebbe from Robert le Mercer[7]. Alms sufficient for the purpose were probably already [Pg 3]forthcoming, as the new Order did not have to wait long for recognition. Though they only occupied this house till the following summer[8], they were there joined by ‘many honest bachelors and many eminent men’[9]; and it may have been owing to this increase in their numbers that they left their first abode in 1225 and hired a house with ground attached from Richard the Miller[10]. It is significant of the rapid growth of opinion in their favour that Richard

Enthusiasm and self-sacrifice were the powerful agents which ensured success and favour to the early Franciscans, and many are the stories of their primitive poverty and its effects; and if the convent at Oxford was not especially distinguished like that at Cambridge by ‘paucilitas pecuniae,’ or like that at York by ‘zelus paupertatis[11],’ the Oxford Minorites, during the time of Agnellus at least, departed but little from the ideal of their founder[12], and lived the life of the poor among whom they ministered. The pangs of hunger were not unknown in the convent; and on one occasion the friars were in debt to the amount of ten marks for food[13]. Their first houses were mean and small—too small for the numbers who flocked to their Order[14]; and the infirmary was

When at length they built their church, the brethren worked with their own hands, and a bishop and an abbat who had assumed the coarse habit of the friars are said to have ‘carried water and sand and stones for the building of the place[16].’

[Pg 4]The appearance of the Minorites was no less humble than their buildings. Their habits of coarse gray or brown cloth[17], tied round the waist with a cord, often worn and patched, as Grostete loved to see them, hardly[18] distinguished them from ‘simple rustics[19].’ In the convent at Oxford, pillows were forbidden, and the use of shoes was permitted only to the infirm or old, and that by special licence[20]. We hear of two of the brethren returning from a chapter held at Oxford at Christmas time singing as they

Even from the robbers and murderers who infested the woods near Oxford the Barefoot Friars were safe[22].

‘Three things,’ said Friar Albert, Minister General, ‘tended to the exaltation of the Order,—bare feet, coarse garments, and the rejecting of money[23]’; and the Oxford Franciscans were as zealous in the last respect as in the other two. The Archdeacon of Northampton sent a bag of money to Friar Adam Marsh, and when the latter refused it, the messenger threw it down in the cell and left it:—

The evidence of the Public Records, containing scattered notices of grants from the Crown, is striking on this point, and the poverty of these early Franciscans can hardly be better illustrated than by the[Pg 5] means taken to relieve it. During the long reign of Henry III, the Patent, Close, and Liberate Rolls contain only three grants of money to the house of the Minorites at Oxford, and all of them are due to exceptional circumstances. They are, ten marks for the support of a provincial chapter in 1238, 60s. for their houses in 1245 in lieu of six oaks which the king had before given them, and three marks for the fabric of their church in 1246[25]. The alms to the house at Oxford are almost wholly in kind, and consist chiefly of supplies of firewood from the royal forests round Oxford. The earliest recorded instance of royal bounty was a grant of thirteen oaks in ‘Brehull’ (Brill) forest for fuel on the 9th Jan. 1231[26]. A few years later they received fifteen cartloads of brushwood from Shotover forest[27], and in 1237 fifteen oaks in Wychwood Forest ‘to make charcoal[28].’ Similar notices occur almost every year—sometimes twice a year—throughout the reign of Henry III[29]. In 1240 the keepers of the wines at Southampton were ordered to deliver one cask of Gascon wine, of the king’s bounty, to the Friars Minors at Oxford ‘to celebrate masses[30].’ In 1248 the Sheriff of Oxford received orders to

But a fortnight later the king repented of his generosity and assigned the same cask to one of his numerous relatives[32]. Of more interest, as showing that the friars were really classed with the poor of the town, is a royal brief of the 12th of Dec. 1244 to the bailiffs of Oxford, bidding them

With all their poverty and holiness they were singularly free from that form of piety which consists in wearing a sad countenance and appearing unto men to fast. We hear indeed of strict silence, of constant prayer, of vigils that lasted the whole night[34].

Grostete said to a Friar Preacher, ‘Three things are necessary to temporal health—to eat, sleep, and be merry[37].’ Excessive austerity was discountenanced by the authorities of the Oxford convent. Friar Albert of Pisa, who was himself ‘always cheerful and merry in the society of the brethren[38],’ compelled Friar Eustace de Merc, contrary to custom, to eat fish, saying that the Order lost many good persons through their indiscretion[39]. Grostete again

The friars lovingly treasured up the great bishop’s puns and jokes and[Pg 7] wise sayings[41], and were always ready to tell or appreciate a good story. From first to last they had the reputation of being excellent company[42], and were welcome at the tables of the rich or well-to-do[43]. They were allowed by the rule to

a practice which occasionally caused some scandal[45]; and Friar Albert of Pisa ordered them to keep silence in the house of hosts, except among the preachers and friars of other provinces[46]. Like St. Francis himself, the Oxford friars often possessed the courtesy and charm of manner which is born of sympathy[47]; and it was perhaps to this quality that their employment as diplomatic agents is to be attributed. Thus Agnellus was chosen in 1233 to negotiate with the rebellious Earl Marshall and try to bring him back to his allegiance[48]. Adam Marsh was on more than one occasion sent beyond the sea as royal emissary[49], and Edward I sent Oxford Minorites to treat for peace with his enemies[50]. But to the mediaeval mind, there was a cause more sacred than that of peace or good government; and the Franciscans would not have had their great influence—would not have become leaders of men throughout the world—had they not shared the one ideal, which still even in the thirteenth century appealed to every class in every country of Europe. The Crusades attracted the scholastic philosopher no less than the baron with his sins to expiate, or the serf with his liberty to win. It was partly to increase his influence as a missionary[51] that Adam of Oxford, one of the first ‘masters’ who joined the Order[52], took the vows of St. Francis;[Pg 8] against the wishes of his brethren in England, who hoped to keep among them so famous and learned a convert, and who indeed feared lest he should come under heretical influences[53], he went to Gregory IX, and at his own prayer was sent by the Pope to preach to the Saracens[54]. When Prince Edward went to the Holy Land in 1270, he took with him as preacher Friar William de Hedley, the lecturer and regent master of the Friars Minors at Oxford[55]. Hedley died before the army reached Acre; but these learned friars did not flinch when summoned to meet a sterner fate. In 1289 Tripoli was captured by the Saracens: an English friar led the last charge of the despairing Christians, carrying aloft the cross till his arms were hewn off;

The friars of both Orders soon took a leading part in the affairs of the University. As Bishop of Lincoln[57], Grostete continued to exercise a kind of paternal authority over the University[58], and his high character and long connexion with Oxford gave him an influence which was denied to his successors. It was natural that this influence should be reflected on the Franciscans, whom he had taken under his especial care and among whom was his ‘true friend and faithful counsellor[59]’ Adam Marsh. The latter was specially summoned to the congregation to hear and advise on the answer sent by Grostete to some petitions of the University[60], and we find him interceding with the Bishop on behalf of the Chancellor, Radulph of Sempringham[61]. One of the most important stages in the constitutional development of the University is marked by the charter of Henry III in 1244, which constituted a special tribunal for the scholars, and formed the basis of the Chancellor’s jurisdiction. On the 11th of May of the same year, a deed of acknowledgment was executed at Reading and signed and sealed on behalf of the University by the Prior of the Friars Preachers, the Minister of the Friars Minors,[Pg 9] the Chancellor of the University, the Archdeacons of Lincoln and Cornwall, and Friar Robert Bacon[62]. Edward I in 1275[63] appointed ‘Friars John de Pecham and Oliver de Encourt’ royal commissioners to decide a suit between Master Robert de Flemengvill[64] and a Jewess named Countess, the wife of Isaac Pulet, which had long been pending in the Chancellor’s court; this however was not to be treated as a precedent to the prejudice of the Chancellor’s jurisdiction.

It is probable that the example afforded by the houses of student friars was not lost on the founders of the early colleges. We know that Walter de Merton was a friend of Adam Marsh[65], and a benefactor of the friars, but it would be dangerous to attempt to trace any direct Franciscan influence in the statutes of his college[66]. There is however no doubt about the connexion of the Franciscans with the foundation of Balliol College. Sir John de Balliol died in 1269 without having established his house for poor scholars on a permanent footing. His widow Devorguila first gave them a definite organisation in 1282. According to an old tradition[67], she was induced to take this step by her Franciscan confessor, Friar Richard de Slikeburne. It is clear that the latter was her most trusted and energetic agent in carrying out the plan. Devorguila urges him by all means in his power to promote the perpetuation of ‘our house of Balliol[68],’ and the executors of Sir John de Balliol assigned certain moneys to the scholars of the house

Nor was the connexion merely a transitory one. The statutes of[Pg 10] 1282[70] are addressed to Friar Hugh de Hertilpoll and Master William de Menyl, who are evidently the two ‘proctors’ mentioned in the document. To the proctors (who did not belong to the house but were in the position of permanent visitors) was entrusted the institution of the principal after his election by the scholars, together with a general supervision over the economy of the college. They alone could expel a refractory scholar, and they were constituted the special guardians of the poorer students[71]. Nothing remains to show how long the first proctors held their office, or how their successors were appointed. It is probable however that the office was intended to be a perpetual one[72]—not a temporary expedient to be called into existence from time to time,—and further that one of the proctors was always a Franciscan. Two other documents bearing on the subject are known to exist. In 1325 a doubt had arisen whether the members of the college might study any science except the liberal arts; it was declared to be unlawful to do so and contrary to the mind of the founder, and was consequently forbidden

The second document[74] is a letter dated 1433 addressed to the Bishop of London by

The Rectors having, ‘according to the exigency of the office which we discharge upon the rule of the said college and the observance of the statutes thereof,’ inquired into the working of the first statute, decided, with the consent of the majority of the house, that it was prejudicial to the college, and asked the Bishop to consent to the modification of it[75].

It will be readily admitted that in the thirteenth century the Oxford Franciscans deserved their high reputation. It is true, that frequent[Pg 11] complaints are heard of the decline of the Order[76]—that many relaxations had been introduced into the Rule. But these were not demanded by the English province. When Haymo was General, orders were issued by the Chapter that friars should be elected in each province to note any points in the Rule which seemed to require revision, and send them to the Minister General. Eccleston[77] gives the names of three friars elected for this purpose in England—Adam Marsh, the foremost of the Oxford friars; Peter of Tewkesbury, Custodian of Oxford; and Henry de Burford.

[Pg 12]

CHAPTER II.

PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS.

For about a hundred years from the date of their settlement in Oxford, the Friars Minors were gradually acquiring property. We have seen that after a short sojourn in the house of Robert le Mercer, the house of Richard le Muliner became their first permanent abode. The position of the former cannot be at all definitely ascertained; it was in the parish of St. Ebbe’s[79], probably near the church and within the city walls[80]. Wood places it between the church and the Watergate. But he is certainly wrong in the position he ascribes to the second house, namely,

[Pg 13]The house of Richard the Miller was undoubtedly between the wall and Freren Street (Church Street). In 1244 Henry III allowed the friars to throw down the wall of the town in order to ‘connect their new place with the old one[82].’ Even apart from the fact that the Mercer’s house did not at this time belong to them, it is obvious that the houses which they acquired in 1224 and 1225 would not in 1244 be distinguished as the ‘old place’ and the ‘new place’ respectively. The ‘new place’ refers to lands which came into their possession about the time of this grant, and of which Wood knew nothing, while the Miller’s house formed part of the ‘old place.’

In fact, several years elapsed before the friars obtained property outside the city wall, their first efforts being directed to secure the land between the wall and Freren Street. It was not long before their cramped area was enlarged. In the Mayoralty of John Pady[83] the citizens of Oxford subscribed[84] forty-three marks sterling to buy from William, son of Richard de Wileford, his house in St. Ebbe’s, with all its appurtenances, ‘to house the Friars Minors for ever,’ the said good men of Oxford giving to William one pound of cummin annually in lieu of all service[85]. The next grant of which we find mention seems also to have been an act of municipal, rather than of private, charity. In 1236[86] Robert, son of Robert Oen, had given them a house adjoining their land, on condition that he,

should have the same privilege attaching to his new house in the parish of St. Michael at the North Gate. This house of Robert Oen’s in St. Ebbe’s was one of the ‘mural mansions,’ on the occupiers of which the duty of repairing the city wall fell[87]. The obligation, however, was now, when the house came into the hands of the friars, willingly undertaken with the King’s assent by the Mayor and good men of Oxford.

Under the ministry of Agnellus any tendency to accumulate property was rigorously suppressed[88], nor does his successor Albert[Pg 14] appear to have been more lenient[89]. But under Haymo of Faversham (1238-9) and William of Nottingham (1239-51) a different spirit began to prevail, and one far less in accordance with the original idea of the Order. Haymo

And under William of Nottingham the Oxford house gained a large increase of territory[91].

It was in 1245 that this took place, and a remarkably full series of records relating to the event is still extant. By a deed dated 22nd December, 1244[92], the King gave the Friars Minors permission,

and they were further allowed to throw down the old wall which stretched across their habitation. But in 1248[94] this grant, as far as it related to the wall, was cancelled; the old wall was to be repaired, and the proposed new wall was not mentioned.

There can be little doubt that in December, 1244, the friars did not possess the land which they were then allowed to enclose; it is indeed very doubtful whether they had any property south of the wall. Possibly they may have acquired already the place which they held in 1278,

The value was then unknown, nor is the position specified[97]. It was, however, no doubt situated in the suburb of St. Ebbe’s parish. Two other plots of ground are mentioned in the same document as belonging to the Friars: of one of these (that granted by Thomas Walonges) we have accurate information, and shall mention it in its due place. Of the other nothing further is known than that they held it by grant from Master Richard de Mepham. But the grant was probably of later date than 1244. Richard was Archdeacon of Oxford in 1263, became Dean of Lincoln in 1273, and probably died in 1274 at the council of Lyons[98].

But the royal grant in the Patent Roll of 29 Henry III is explained by the fact that the Franciscans, or rather their benefactors, were already negotiating for the transfer of a large part of the property there described, if not of the whole of it.

In February, 1245, Thomas Valeynes, or Valoignes (or Walonges as he is called in the Inquisition of 6 & 7 Edward I), carried into effect a plan for the benefit of the Friars Minors which it must have taken long to bring to a successful conclusion[99]. It consisted in begging or buying out a number of holders of property in the south-west ‘suburb of Oxford,’ and granting in one case at least tenements in another part of the town as compensation. Thus, in exchange for two messuages with their appurtenances on the south-west of the town, Symon son of Benedict and Leticia[Pg 16] his wife, received one messuage outside the North Gate, together with a building then held by Hugh Marshall,

One messuage with appurtenances was acquired from John Costard and Margery his wife, two from Warin of Dorchester and Juliana his wife, one from William ‘le Barbeur’ and Alice his wife, one from Henry ‘le Teler’ and Alice his wife, and a little later[100] one curtilage ‘in the suburb of Oxford in the parish of St. Budoc,’ from John Aylmer and Christiana his wife. All these eight tenements Thomas de Valeynes, ‘at the petition’ of the former owners, assigned

and we may reasonably conclude that they filled the space from the City Wall on the north to Trill Mill Stream on the south, and from Littlegate Street on the east to a line drawn from the ‘fee of the Abbat of Bec in the parish of St. Bodhoc’s’ to the West Gate on the west[101].

Shortly after this, namely, on the 22nd of April, 1245[102], Henry III gave the Friars, to enlarge their new area,

with permission to make a bridge over the arm of the river dividing it from their houses, and to enclose it with a wall, or in any other way which would insure ‘the security of their houses and the [Pg 17]tranquillity of their religion,’ On the same day[103] the King ordered the Barons of the Exchequer to deduct from the fine of sixty marks,

The next grant is dated the 27th of November, 1246[105]. The King announces that he has handed over to the friars, for the enlargement of their premises, the whole messuage, with its appurtenances, which Laurence Wych (or Wyth), Mayor of Oxford, committed to him for that purpose, desiring them to enclose the same as they shall see fit:

It is quite uncertain where this land lay, and whether Wych granted it in his public or private capacity.

For the next fifty years, excepting the undated grants of Richard Mepham and Agnes widow of Guydo, which probably belong to this period, there is no record of a gift of land to the Minorites. On the east they had already reached the permanent limit of their property[106], and the Friars of the Penitence of Jesus Christ settled about the year 1260 on the ground lying to the west. This formed the parish of St. Budoc. In 1262[107] the King allowed these friars to build an oratory here; in 1265[108] he granted them, as patron, the church of St. Budoc (which adjoined their premises, and which, owing to the removal or death of the parishioners, was too impoverished to support one chaplain), ‘to make thence a chapel for themselves.’ With the church they acquired[109]

[Pg 18]with the proviso that the cemetery should always be treated as consecrated[110] ground. The value of the church was 20s. a year[111].

At the Council of Lyons in 1274 the Friars of the Penitence of Jesus Christ, or ‘Friars of the Sack,’ were forbidden to admit new members[112], and the Order came to an end when the old members died out. The Minorites and their friends therefore applied themselves to secure the property. As early as 1296 Boniface VIII wrote to the Bishop of Lincoln, ordering him[113] to allow the Friars Minors to take possession of the house or area of the Friars of the Sack, whenever the five remaining brethren should die or transfer themselves to other religious Orders. At the court of Clement V, the first of the Avignon popes, the claims of the Minorites were urged by John of Britanny, Earl of Richmond; and Clement issued a Bull in their favour, dated the 27th of May, 1309 (VI Kal. Jun. A^o IV)[114].

This prayer the Pope goes on to grant ‘of his special favour,’ mentioning the earnest supplications of John of Britanny[115] on behalf of the friars.

The King, however, also had a claim to dispose of lands which his grandfather had granted, and which, in default of heirs or successors, legally escheated to the Crown. By Letters Patent dated the 28th of March, 1310[116], Edward II assigned to the Friars Minors the property which Henry III had previously given to the[Pg 19] Penitentiary Friars, with the same stipulation as to the cemetery. The land is accurately described; it was contiguous to the place of the Friars Minors, in the suburb of Oxford, twenty and a half perches long from north to south, six perches wide at the south end, two and a half at the north, and four perches seven feet in the middle.

Letters Patent of the same day[117] confirmed the grant of four other parcels of ground to the Friars Minors: some of these may have been previously held by the Friars of the Sack. The ‘plot of ground in Oxford,’ five perches two feet from east to west, two perches and a half from north to south, conferred on the Minorites by John Wyz and Emma his wife, may have been within the walls, near the West Gate; the others were in the suburb. Henry Tyeys gave land measuring six perches by five, and lying between the site of St. Budoc’s Church and the Thames (Trill Mill Stream); Richard le Lodere’s land, measuring fourteen and a half perches five feet, by four perches and three feet, and stretching from the Thames to the above-mentioned place of Henry Tyeys, was included in the grant, as was a larger plot[118], measuring sixteen and a half perches from the Thames to the ‘royal way,’ and ten perches in breadth; which seems to have included the south part of Paradise Gardens[119].

All these places are described as adjoining the property of the Warden and Friars Minors of Oxford.

It was probably at the instance of the Crown and as a protest against the papal claims that the Minorites a few years later formally surrendered to the King the area which had belonged to the Penitentiaries, ‘in its entirety as it came into their hands,’ and received it back of the King’s special favour in pure and perpetual alms[120].

One fragment of the Penitentiary Friars’ property came into the hands of the Franciscans somewhat later. In October, 1319, an Inquisitio ad quod Damnum[121] was held in Oxford to decide whether Richard Cary could, without prejudice to the King or others, bestow on the Friars Minors a place in the suburb of Oxford, adjacent to[Pg 20] their property, and measuring five perches in length and five in breadth. The jurors declared that the grant would not be injurious to the King or others, and that Cary possessed sufficient property in the town to discharge all his civic duties. The place ‘at the time when it was built’ was worth 20s. a year, but now, owing to its ruinous condition, only 2s. Cary held it for a rent of 8s. a year of Johanna, wife of Walter of Wycombe, Agatha her sister, and John son of Alice, who was wife of Andrew Culvard, the heirs of Henry Owayn; they held it of the Prior of Steventon, paying 4d. a year in lieu of all services. The plot was therefore the fee of the Abbat of Bec mentioned above, and is probably the same as

A few months previously a similar inquisition[123] was held at Oxford, which resulted in an addition to the Minorite property on the east side within the wall. This was a plot of ground of the annual value of 2s., five perches by six, granted to them by John Culvard. The town, however, claimed the right,

In 1321[124] Walter Morton obtained leave to grant in mortmain to the Franciscans a place with its appurtenances, measuring five perches by five, in the suburb of Oxford; and similar licence was given to John de Grey de Retherfeld[125] in 1337 to bestow on them a tenement, six perches by five, lying next their habitation on the east side within the town. This brings us to the end of the list of grants of landed property to the Oxford Minorites—a list which we may claim to be fairly complete. It is interesting to note from what classes the donors were drawn. Most of them were men of business—the leading tradesmen of the town[126]. Three of them, Laurence Wych, John Culvard, and Richard Cary, were at various times Mayors of Oxford,[Pg 21] and the two latter represented the city in Parliament[127]. Richard Mepham belonged to the higher rank of ecclesiastics. Master Thomas de Valeynes seems to have been a person of some importance in Oxfordshire and the adjoining counties[128].

Buildings.

Of the buildings of the Friars Minors in Oxford we have disappointingly little information—with the exception of the boundary wall already mentioned there are no remains of their house now visible. Excavations might perhaps yield interesting results, but most of the ground is thickly built over, and the information derived from the records and other sources is rarely precise enough to enable us to identify with any certainty the sites of the various buildings.

For the first twenty years the Friary must have presented a very modest, not to say mean, appearance, and the brethren were probably contented to take the accommodation afforded by the houses, which were granted them, with little alteration. The infirmary built by Agnellus has already been noticed. After they had been nearly a year in Oxford, the friars built a small chapel[129]. In 1232, the King gave them

adding that

Probably this refers to the original chapel. It had a choir where the brethren attended and celebrated divine service[131], and at, or over, the door of which stood a crucifix, or wooden cross[132]. It was here, in the choir before the altar, that Agnellus was buried in a ‘leaden box,’ as became the zelator paupertatis[133]. The chapel was pulled down when the new church was finished[134]. Under the auspices of Agnellus rose their first school, which was apparently the finest of[Pg 22] their early buildings[135]. Whether this was afterwards enlarged, or whether new schools were built on the same site or elsewhere, there is no longer any means of deciding.

These houses were situated within the wall, and it was not till the increase of the ‘area’ between 1240 and 1250 that building on a large scale was commenced between the wall and Trill Mill Stream[136]. The tendency to build was strenuously resisted by the stricter party among the friars—the party which upheld the early traditions of the Order. Eccleston relates how an Oxford friar appeared after death to the custodian and warned him that,

An obscure passage in a letter of Adam Marsh probably refers to the same tendency; even novices, he laments, are taught to neglect the things of the spirit

The opposition of the older generation was, however, unavailing, and a ‘stately and magnificent[139]’ convent began to rise. But of the new friary, too, there are but scanty notices. No English king bestowed on the house of Franciscans at Oxford that loving care which Henry III bestowed on the Minorite Church at Reading, or Edward II on the Dominican Church which rose over the tomb of his ill-fated favourite at Langley. From royal grants we learn that building was going on at the Grey Friars of Oxford in 1240, when ten oaks were given to them by the King for timber[140]. In 1245 (July 7th),

and a further grant of six oaks for timber in 1272 shows that the operations were of a protracted nature[142]. From similar sources we find that the Church, which was dedicated to St. Francis, was in[Pg 23] process of erection in February, 1246[143], and February, 1248[144]. At the latter date the friars are again permitted to

It would appear from this that the street was outside the wall. Mr. Parker, however, states positively that it was ‘the inner road’ which they were permitted to enclose[145]; in Wheeler’s Garden, south-west of St. Ebbe’s Churchyard, there used to be a line of old walling, running parallel to the city wall inside, and the space between these walls may have been the street in question[146]. It must be remembered, however, that the friars had already in 1244 acquired the road with the right to enclose it, and to throw down this section of the city wall. In 1248, therefore, we may well believe that little existed of the wall, which on the south side was never a very prominent feature. The church running due east and west would extend along and across the site of the wall, the west end being outside, the east end inside. From the south end of Paradise Place, where the wall juts out southwards for a few yards, to a point about the north end of King’s Terrace, there have long been no signs of the city wall; and it is probably here that the Grey Friars’ Church stood. The tradition is still preserved in the name Church Place. Of the appearance of the church we know little. The roof was tiled[147], like that of the Grey Friars’ Church at Reading; it is probable the east end was flat, and there was no triforium[148]. Wood thinks that one of the eight towers which figured in the pageant at the inthronization of Warham in 1504,[Pg 24] represented the tower of the Grey Friars[149]. William of Worcester has left a somewhat puzzling[150] description of the church in 1480[151].

Reckoning William’s ‘steps’ at half a yard each[152], and correcting his apparent mistake in addition, we find that the church measured seventy-nine yards from east to west, the choir containing thirty-four yards, and the nave forty-five. At its widest part the church measured twenty yards, ten yards of which were taken up by the north aisle. Hence the width of the nave properly so called, and of the choir, which in friars’ churches is, where it exists, of the same width as the nave[153], was ten yards. The choir was aisleless, and the north aisle was probably the only one in the church: this, too, narrowed from ten yards to four towards the east end of the nave. In 1535 Friar Henry Standish, Bishop of St. Asaph, bequeathed £40 ‘for the building of an aisle joining to the church of the Grey friars, Oxon[154],’ probably on the south side, but it is almost certain that this was never built.

The wider aisle must have extended nearly the whole length of the nave to allow space for the north door and the ten chapels, all of which were built on to the north wall. They would be in part sepulchral chantries, supported by noble families or gilds, often containing the image or shrine of some saint, while the shrine of the patron saint stood behind the high altar. They were presumably later additions, and whether the church in its original form attained[Pg 25] the proportions here described must remain doubtful. But there is no reason to suppose it was afterwards enlarged to any great extent. In the thirteenth century, benefactors, great and small, were willing and eager to help the friars to raise those splendid buildings which drew forth the fierce denunciations of later reformers; and though much of the church was doubtless built, like that at London, ‘from good common alms[155],’ there can be little question that the chief ‘founder and benefactor’ was the wealthy Richard Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall, and King of the Romans[156]. It was in the choir of this church that his heart was buried[157]

Here, too, five years later the remains of his third wife, Beatrice of Falkenstein, were interred, ‘before the great altar[159];’ and many other monuments of nobles and famous men must have given the interior of the church an imposing appearance. Among those buried here were several of the Golafres: the tomb of Sir John Golafre, who died at Quinton, Bucks, in 1379[160], was in the chancel; that of his younger brother, William, was probably in the same part of the church[161]. Sir John’s illegitimate son, John Golafre, knight and lord of Langley, bequeathed his body to be buried next his father’s, if he should die in England[162]; but

[Pg 26]William Lord Lovell, by a will dated 18 March, 1454/5, made provision

The wills of less distinguished persons occasionally contain information as to the interior of the church. In 1430 Robert Keneyshame, Bedel of the University, willed to be buried in the Franciscan Church,

James Hedyan, bachelor in both laws and principal of Eagle Hall, was buried in the nave[166]. Agnes, wife of Michael Norton, was in 1438 buried

And in 1526 Richard Leke, ‘late bruer of Oxford,’ desired

But more honoured than any of these was the ‘fair stone sepulchre[169]’ in which the body of Agnellus, the only Provincial Minister known to have been buried at Oxford, found its final resting place. For the shrine of Agnellus possessed all the fascination of miraculous association and miraculous power. When the friars, many years after his death, went in the night to remove the body from the original chapel before its demolition,

Here, too, we are told, was the tomb of one greater than Agnellus; but if the statement of John Rouse, that Roger Bacon was buried among the Franciscans at Oxford, is anything more than a tradition, it was perhaps not in the church, but in the common burial place of the brethren of the convent, that the Warwick antiquary found his grave[171].

[Pg 27]The cloisters, of which we find no mention till the dissolution, were no doubt situated on the south of the church, round ‘Penson’s Gardens.’ Whether the friars were buried in the cloisters, the garth, the chapter-house, or ‘the cemetery of the Friars Minors,’ in which John Dongan was interred in 1464[172] or sometimes in one place, sometimes in another, is unknown. On the east of the cloisters would be the chapter-house[173]; over it, and joining the church, a dormitory[174]. On the south of the cloisters, opposite the church, stood the refectory. It is possible, but not probable, that the long narrow building stretching down towards Trill Mill Stream, which is marked in old maps of Oxford[175], was the refectory: Bridge Street marks the site. The library may have been on the west side of the cloisters, but no hint remains as to the building or its position, while the contents may be more appropriately treated elsewhere. The warden’s house is equally unknown; he may perhaps merely have had rooms set apart in some one of the larger buildings[176], as was probably the case with the vice-warden[177]. From the Lanercost Chronicle we learn that in the thirteenth century the ‘master of the schools’ had a chamber of his own[178]; and Wiclif tells us that in his time

Ample accommodation for guests was a marked feature in most religious houses, and there is no reason to suppose that the Oxford Franciscan Friary formed an exception to a custom which, while it excited some animosity against the apostles of poverty, tended to ensure the favour and secure the alms of the rich[180].

[Pg 28]The convent was supplied with good water by a conduit of leaden pipes, which, according to Wadding, was made in the thirteenth century by a magnate at his own expense, and extended many miles under the watersheds of the Isis and Cherwell[181]. In 1246-7 we hear that the Friars Preachers and Minors had appropriated many places on the Thames, and had made there ‘ditches and walls and other things[182].’ Lastly, there were three gates: one in Freren Street[183], perhaps an entrance to the church through ‘Church Place;’ another in St. Ebbe’s Street, opposite Beef Lane[184], where St Ebbe’s Churchyard now extends; and a third—their principal entrance, which existed in Wood’s time—in Littlegate Street, apparently where the latter is now joined by Charles Street[185].

This completes the list of conventual as distinct from the farm buildings, and if the account is meagre and unsatisfactory, we may try to console ourselves with William of Nottingham’s retort, when a friar threatened to accuse him before the Minister General ‘because the place at London was not enclosed:’

[Pg 29]

CHAPTER III.

FRANCISCAN SCHOOLS AT OXFORD.

St. Francis himself was always strongly opposed to the learning of his age.

But it was inevitable that the missionaries to the towns should be armed with a knowledge of theology to enable them to cope with the numerous heresies of the thirteenth century, and with a knowledge of physical science to enable them to cope with the frequent pestilences caused by the disregard of sanitary conditions[188]. In addition to this the influence of many learned men in the Order could not but be felt; and the early Franciscans in England were as zealous for learning as for good works.

Agnellus, though in Wood’s words ‘he never smelt of an Academy or tasted of humane learning[190],’ frankly recognised the necessity. The school which he built at Oxford has already been noticed:

Agnellus rendered the greatest service to his Order by persuading Robert Grostete, the foremost scholar of his time, and the most influential man at Oxford, to accept the post of lecturer to the friars[192]. The exact date at which he undertook these duties is uncertain. He resigned the archdeaconries of Northampton and Leicester in 1231, but he may have been lecturer to the Franciscans some time before this; certainly he was closely connected with their house at Oxford[193]. He was resident in the University in 1234[194], and according to both Eccleston[195] and the Lanercost Chronicle[196], he gave up his lectureship only to accept the bishopric of Lincoln in 1235.

He was succeeded by Master Peter[197], who afterwards became a bishop in Scotland. The third reader was Master Roger Wesham[198], who afterwards (namely in or before 1239) was made Dean of Lincoln, and then (1245) Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. The fourth was Master Thomas Wallensis, who,

[Pg 31]Thomas was made Archdeacon of Lincoln by Grostete in 1238, at which time he was lecturing in Paris[200]; he was then young[201] and it is probable that he was already archdeacon when he lectured to the friars at Oxford.

All these men were seculars, not friars: it was important at a time when, as Roger Bacon says[202], ‘the Order of Minors was new and neglected by the world,’ to secure the services of men of recognised position and ability. Of Master Peter nothing further is known. The other two were certainly close friends of Grostete[203]. Matthew Paris bears testimony to the high character and learning, the kindness and tact, of Roger Wesham[204]. Bacon ranks Thomas Wallensis among ‘the wise men of old[205],’ who studied foreign languages and knew the value of philology; and even Paris admits that this enemy of monks[206] was a man of lofty purpose, and accepted the bishopric of St. David’s, though it was the poorest see,

The divinity lecturer to the Franciscans or ‘Master of the Schools[208],’ as he was also called, had, as such, no status in the University. It is even doubtful whether he counted as a ‘regent master,’ unless he also lectured in the University Schools. Thus Adam Marsh protested against being required by the Masters to subscribe a new statute on the ground

[Pg 32]But in a letter written shortly before this, and referring to the same subjects, he mentions that he was ‘lecturing on Holy Scripture’ to the friars[210]. The position of the lector was, in fact, not unlike that of a college tutor, except that he was always a man of proved ability and long experience. To the friars he was far more than a theological lecturer; he was a trusted friend, on whose advice and sympathy and help they might reckon in all the conduct of life. Such at least was the tradition established by Grostete and carried on by Adam Marsh[211]. Both of them men versed in affairs of state, both men of acknowledged weight in the counsels of the realm[212], and fearless opponents of illegality and oppression, they not only trained the friars in theology and philosophy, but taught them to comprehend the social needs of the age.

and Simon de Montfort had frequent consultations with the friar about his government of Gascony[214]. It was from their daily intercourse with men like these that the Oxford Franciscans became, if not the leaders, the spokesmen of the constitutional movement of the thirteenth century[215]. The corpse of Simon de Montfort was[Pg 33] buried by the Grey Friars of Evesham, and it is probably to the Franciscan school that the Latin poems in his honour are to be ascribed[216], as well as the form of prayer addressed to him:—

‘Sis pro nobis intercessor
Apud Deum, qui defensor
In terris extiteras[217].’

The Oxford Franciscans regarded him as a saint and a martyr, though he died excommunicate, and testified to the miracles which he wrought[218].

The lector had also his socius[219], a younger friar who acted as his secretary, and whose time was almost entirely at his disposal. The position of both lector and socius will be best illustrated by two extracts from the letters of Adam Marsh.

In the first of these[220], addressed to the Provincial, he writes that he has found Friar A. de Hereford, whom the Provincial had assigned to him as his socius, affectionate and of good character, docile and well-read, and far more capable than ‘some of those who are appointed by the counsel of the discreet to instruct in Holy Scripture.’

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

The position of the socius probably altered but little after this time. That of the lector underwent 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 leading[Pg 35] brethren 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.),

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

However, the Franciscans at Oxford never obtained the right[Pg 36] which 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 be ex officio representatives 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 to[Pg 37] the 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

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, required[Pg 38] that 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,

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:

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

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, he[Pg 39] argued, agree to a statute of which he disapproved, merely to gain his immediate point. The promised ‘graces’ were fallacious,

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,

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,

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 other[Pg 40] Mendicant 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.

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]:—

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,

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 their[Pg 42] theological studies. Roger Bacon, as usual, has a decided opinion on the necessity of such a training. Writing in 1271[260], he says:—

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,

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 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:—

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 the[Pg 44] first 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], to[Pg 45] the 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) and put his 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 oppositions pro 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 in[Pg 46] theology[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 the Sentences of 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 he knew him to be a fit person in morals and learning, the other Regents, that they believed him to be such[288]. Within a year from this time[289], the new Bachelor had to begin his lectures on the Sentences, 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 the Sentences[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 done biblice; i.e. without commenting or discussing questions, except only on the text (quaestiones ... literales)[295]. Further, after the lapse of a year from the conclusion[Pg 47] of 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 them[Pg 48] had to swear that they knew the 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 thirteenth[Pg 49] century 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 responsion pro 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 the[Pg 50] period 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. The religiosi wore 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

Friar William Woodford, Wiclif’s contemporary, started from London to take his D.D. with £40 in his purse[333].

Attempts were made to curtail the expenses of the friars. In his constitutions for the reformation of the Franciscan Order in 1336, Pope Benedict XII decreed[334], that

It became usual, both among religious and seculars, to commute the expenses of the feast for a fixed money payment to the University. According to the scale fixed by statute in 1478[336], seculars who were able to spend at the University more than £40 and less than £100 (a year), paid twenty marks in lieu of the feast; those able to spend £100 or more, paid £20. A monk’s composition was assessed at twenty marks; a friar’s at ten marks or £6 13s. 4d. (equivalent to about £80 of present money). The sums actually paid by the Franciscans varied considerably. Sometimes the statutable amount was paid[337]. Friar John Whytwell (1449/50) paid £10[338]. Friar Richard Ednam (1463) was required to give £15, as well as a liberata to the Regents ex sumptu proprio[339]. More often (especially in the sixteenth century) a reduction of the sum was granted by the University, the concession being usually accompanied by the condition that the friar should say masses pro bono statu Regentium[340]. Friar Thomas Anneday was allowed to pay seven marks, ‘because he is poor and has few friends[341].’ Others obtained a reduction of their composition by one half[342]; or the whole sum might be remitted under certain conditions, as in the case of Friar Nicholas de Burgo[343]. Sometimes Congregation refused to allow the full reduction asked for[344].

It was further customary for inceptors to provide robes for masters and others attending their inception. Perhaps a trace of this custom may be seen in the grace to Friar Gonsalvo of Portugal, who at his inception was to

During the period of necessary regency, which followed inception, a secular had the right to attend all meetings of Congregation, and was bound to deliver ‘ordinary’ lectures publicly in the schools for the remainder of the year in which he incepted and the whole of the following year[346]. A statute of 1478 states the custom as enforced in the case of the Mendicants[347]:—

Perhaps the exclusion of the friars, except one of each Order, from the house of Congregation and consequently from the government of the University, dates from the middle of the fourteenth century[348]. In 1454 Friar John David, S.T.P., supplicated for leave

Dispensations from necessary regency were often obtained. In 1452 Friar Anthony de Vallibus, D.D., asked leave to absent himself from all scholastic acts for a fortnight in order to visit his friends who were sick[350]. Friar William Walle was dispensed from fifteen days of his regency in 1518[351]; Friar John Brown from his regency during Lent in 1514[352]. Gilbert Sander and Walter Goodfeld were released from the whole of their necessary regency[353]. John Smyth obtained a similar grace as being ‘warden of a convent and consequently very busy[354].’ Dispensations from the sermon which was to be preached in St. Mary’s within a year of inception were also very frequent[355].

These and other graces were usually granted subject to certain [Pg 53]conditions. The recipient was often to say masses ‘for the pestilence’ or ‘for the welfare of the Regents’[356]: or he had to lecture gratuitously on some specified book[357] or preach a sermon[358]; or again the payment of a sum of money was imposed as a condition[359]. Thus in 1515 Friar John Flavyngur was allowed to give extraordinary lectures on a book of the Decretals,

Friar Thomas Frances received permission in 1521 to incept

Franciscan students were maintained at the Universities by a system of exhibitions. These were provided sometimes by private benefactors[362], usually by the native convent of the student out of the ‘common alms,’ with the occasional assistance of other convents[363]. From the few traces which remain of the custom we may infer that the exhibition was generally reckoned at £5 a year, and that this sum covered the ordinary expenses of living[364]. Masters, lecturers and bachelors, as already stated, were supported by the convent in which they lectured[365]:[Pg 54] but their allowance was probably not much larger than that of the ordinary student friars. Nicholas Hereford, preaching at Oxford in 1382[366], asserted that those of the Mendicants who had graduated as masters or bachelors, in addition to the ample allowance which they got from their community, begged for themselves, saying, ‘I am a bachelor (or master) and require more than others, because I ought to be able to live up to my position.’ (Quia oportet me habere ad expendendum secundum statum meum.)

It is impossible to say what proportion of the Franciscans at Oxford proceeded to a degree. In 1300 we have the names of twenty-two members of the convent: of these, ten at least were then, or became afterwards, Doctors of Divinity[367]. But the proportion of graduates to non-graduates and B.D.’s in the whole convent cannot have been nearly so large. The following statistics are derived from the University Registers[368]. From 1449 to 1463, five Franciscans obtained or supplicated for the doctor’s degree; five others for that of bachelor only. From 1505 to 1538 (i.e. about thirty-three years, as some pages of the Registers are missing), twenty-five Franciscans incepted or supplicated for the degree of D.D.; twenty-six others obtained or supplicated for that of B.D. (one of them also for B.Can.L.): three more were admitted to oppose: one more supplicated for B.Can.L. The proportion of D.D.’s to B.D.’s would generally be larger than this: from 1532 to the dissolution in 1538 fourteen obtained, or supplicated for, the degree of bachelor, two only became D.D.’s: we may reasonably suppose that some of the fifteen bachelors would have proceeded to the doctor’s degree had not the dissolution intervened.

The following figures will show the relative numbers of the various religious houses in Oxford[369]. The Registers from 1449 to 1463 contain the names of 10 Franciscans, 13 Dominicans, 12 Carmelites, 9 Austin Friars, 44 Benedictines, and 8 Cistercians: from 1505 to 1538, of 57 Franciscans, 40[370] Dominicans, 24 Carmelites, 23 Austins, 169 Benedictines, and 44 Cistercians.

[Pg 55]

CHAPTER IV.

BOOKS AND LIBRARIES.

It is difficult to realise the external conditions under which the friars produced their works. At the end of the thirteenth and in the early part of the fourteenth century—the period of their greatest literary activity—privacy must have been almost unknown. Only ministers and lectors at the Universities were allowed to have a separate chamber or compartment shut off from the dormitory[371]. But there can be little doubt that, from Wiclif’s time onwards[372], each Doctor of Divinity had his chamber; and every student had some place allotted to him, in which stood a studium, or combined desk and book-case[373]. Every student friar had books set apart for his especial use[374]; these books[Pg 56] were obtained by gift or bequest[375], by purchase[376] or by assignation by the Provincial[377] or Warden[378], or they had been copied out by the friar himself[379]. Alexander IV expressly declared that they were not the private property of the individual friars[380]; on the death of the friar who had had the use of them, they reverted to the convent, or were distributed to others ‘by the Warden with the consent of the convent and licence of the minister[381].’

There is no reason to suppose that the friars had a chamber specially set apart as a scriptorium; they were comparatively free from the legal routine or ‘office-work’ which the administration of their vast estates imposed on the monks and their clerks. But the transcription of manuscripts was part of the regular work of the Oxford Franciscans; and it is indeed the only kind of manual labour expressly mentioned in connexion with the convent. Roger Bacon’s statement[382] that he could only get a fair copy of his works made for the Pope by writers unconnected with his Order, means merely that there were no professional scribes among the Minorites of Paris.[Pg 57] The vellum which Adam Marsh asked the Custodian of Cambridge to send at his earliest convenience[383], may have been intended for original compositions of the friars, but it was probably to be used for a careful fair copy of some work—perhaps a Missal or a book of the Bible. Several manuscripts, containing the works of Nicholas Gorham, are still extant, which Friar William of Nottingham copied at Oxford with ‘tedious solicitude’ and ‘laborious diligence,’ at the expense of his brother, Sir Hugh of Nottingham[384].

It was naturally in the libraries that most of the literary treasures were stored. In the fifteenth century there were two libraries in the Franciscan convent at Oxford, the library of the convent and the library of the student friars[385]. There is no evidence that either was founded by Grostete[386]. The convent probably received its first considerable collection of books from Adam Marsh, to whom his uncle, Richard Marsh, Bishop of Durham, bequeathed his library in 1226[387]. The next book we hear of at the Grey Friars is the volume of Decretals purchased by Agnellus[388]—doubtless the Decretum of Gratian with the additions codified by Raymund of Pennaforte and approved by Gregory IX in 1230. In 1253, Grostete,

From a rather obscure passage in one of Adam’s letters[390], this would appear to mean all Grostete’s writings ‘both original and translated,’ not all the books which he possessed: on the other hand, a copy of St. Augustine’s De Civitate Dei is extant which the friars received from Grostete[391]. These works of Lincolniensis were in the library in the middle of the fifteenth century, when Dr. Thomas Gascoigne was allowed to consult them[392]. He mentions particularly having seen a[Pg 58] complete copy of Grostete’s letters[393], his autograph gloss or exposition on the Epistles of St. Paul[394], two copies (one of them autograph) of his commentary on the Psalter[395], a treatise against luxury[396], and another super textum[397], both written by his own hand. Boston of Bury notices his translation of the Testamenta XII Patriarcharum in the same place. Friar Thomas Netter of Walden refers to a book De Studio by Grostete, with autograph notes by the author, which he had seen in the Minorite convent[398]; and Wadding mentions two more treatises, or rather sermons, which Grostete gave to the friars—one De Laude Paupertatis, the other De Scala Paupertatis[399]. Probably all these were in the library of the convent[400]. Another relic of Grostete preserved there was his ‘episcopal sandals made of rushes[401].’

The statement that all Roger Bacon’s works were in these libraries rests on the authority of John Twyne[402], but it is not probable that his writings were ever collected in one place. No doubt the works of the scholastic philosophers, and chiefly of the Franciscan schoolmen[403], formed the bulk of the library; which also contained a bibliographical compilation of considerable value, namely the Catalogus illustrium Franciscanorum, of which Leland often makes use[404]. St. Jerome’s ‘Catalogue of Illustrious Men,’ was there bound up with ‘many other good books[405],’ his commentaries on Isaiah and Ezechiel[406], a book[Pg 59] called Speculum Laicorum[407], and a few Hebrew and even Greek manuscripts[408].

Few only of the MSS. seem to have been preserved; very few at any rate can be identified[409]. Caius College possesses two of them, a copy of the Gospels in Greek and a Psalter in Greek[410]. The volume (already referred to) containing St. Augustine’s De Civitate Dei, with Grostete’s annotations, is now in the Bodleian[411]. A thirteenth-century MS. of some of Grostete’s lesser works, with St. Augustine’s De Concordia quatuor Evangeliorum, given to Lincoln College by Gascoigne, was perhaps obtained by him from the Franciscan library[412]. The copy of Jerome’s ‘Catalogue of Illustrious Men,’ which Gascoigne saw in this library, appears to be extant among the MSS. in Lambeth Palace[413]. It may be reasonably conjectured that the single copy of Adam Marsh’s letters[414], and some or all of the treatises bound up in Phillipps MS. 3119[415], were also kept, or at any rate written, in the Oxford [Pg 60]convent. The following interesting notes occur in a Digby manuscript in the Bodleian[416]:—

Sometimes, if we may believe their accusers, the Friars obtained books by less creditable means than gift, bequest, or purchase. In 1330[417] the Sheriff of Oxfordshire received a writ from the King instructing him

failing this the said friars shall be summoned to appear before the King’s justices at Westminster. The Sheriff forwarded this writ to the Mayor, but the latter declared that the friars were not subject to his jurisdiction, ‘and therefore nothing was done in the matter[418].’

The friars had on all sides the reputation of being great collectors of books. Richard Fitzralph, the famous Archbishop of Armagh, was fond of exaggeration[419], and no one will accept without considerable[Pg 61] modifications his statement, made before the Pope in 1257[420], that the friars have grown so numerous and wealthy,

Some rectors of churches, whom the Archbishop had sent to the Universities, had even been obliged to return home owing to the impossibility of getting Bibles and other theological books. Perhaps these rectors were not filled with a passionate desire to learn. In 1373 the University passed a statute against the excessive number of unauthorized booksellers in Oxford[421].

Richard of Bury mentions the great help he received from Dominicans and Franciscans in collecting his books[422], and bears testimony to the magnificence of the libraries of the Mendicants which he visited:

But Richard of Bury notices a tendency among the ‘religious’ to subordinate the love of books to

and the tendency became much stronger after his time. The almost[425] total absence of books in the bequests to the Oxford Franciscans in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries is the more striking because of the frequency of such bequests to colleges. It is said that the Minorites sold many of their books to Dr. Thomas Gascoigne[426]. Certain it is that in the latter days they parted with them, just as ‘forcyd by[Pg 62] necessitie,’ they parted with their jewels and plate[427]. The exclusion of the Mendicant Friars from the use of the University Library by the statutes of 1412[428], cannot have been any real hardship to the Franciscans so long as their own library was intact. In the sixteenth century however this was no longer the case, and we accordingly find some instances of Franciscans supplicating for admission to the library of the University[429]. The earliest instance is in 1507; but, as the registers from 1463 to 1505 are lost, it would of course be ridiculous to attempt to draw from this fact any inference as to the date of the dispersion of the books of the Minorites. Leland visited the Friary shortly before the Dissolution, and we have from his pen the last description of the once famous library[430]:—

[Pg 63]

CHAPTER V.

PLACE OF OXFORD IN THE FRANCISCAN ORGANIZATION.

If the Franciscans became leaders of scholastic thought, they were first and foremost practical workers. ‘Unfitted as the works of Roger Bacon or of Raymond Lully might seem to the practical divine, it was for him, not for the philosophic disputant, whether as a missionary among the Saracens or a combatant of error and heresy at home, that these works were written[431].’ In the case of Roger Bacon this is abundantly evident.

It is difficult to resist the temptation of quoting more passages of this kind[435] (illustrating as they do the Franciscan view of life), especially as, in the dearth of records, actual instances are hard to find: one proof however may be brought that it was not all theory. Among the twenty-two Oxford Minorites, for whom in the year 1300 the Provincial, Hugh of Hertepol, claimed the episcopal licence to hear the[Pg 64] confessions of the crowds who thronged to the church of St. Francis, eight were then or afterwards doctors of divinity and theological lecturers to the Friars at Oxford, and among the others were two names of yet greater fame, Robert Cowton and John Duns Scotus[436]. It must however be added that, of the eight friars who were actually licensed by the bishop to hear confessions, none appears as having subsequently lectured or taken a degree[437].

Here however we may see how the Franciscans brought their philosophy to the test of experience in the details of everyday life; and they possessed to a remarkable degree, in spite of—perhaps because of—their learning, the power of appealing to the hearts of the people.

and his brethren followed this principle in their preaching. ‘Their sermons,’ says Brewer, ‘are full of pithy stories and racy anecdotes; now introducing some popular tradition or legend, now enforcing a moral by some fable or allegory[439].’ It has often occasioned surprise that the generation which saw the rise of poetry in England, saw also the rise of English prose—that, in a word, Wiclif was the contemporary of Chaucer. When we remember that, for a century and a half, men versed in all the learning of their time had been constantly preaching to the people in the vulgar tongue in every part of the country, we shall see less cause to wonder at the vigorous language, the clear and direct expression, of ‘the father of English prose.’

For the learning of the friars was not confined to the Universities[440]. To the Franciscans Oxford was more than a place for study; it was the[Pg 65] centre of a great educational organization which extended throughout the land.

However, in practice this rule was not very strictly adhered to. Sometimes a friar would pursue his studies with a view to becoming reader to a particular convent[442]; but usually, when an ‘extra-university’ lectureship was founded or fell vacant, the convent applied to the Provincial Minister for any lecturer they chose[443]. Thus about the year 1250, the brethren at Norwich requested that Friar Eustace of Normanville should be appointed as their lecturer[444]. Eustace, after consulting Adam Marsh, declined the office with the Minister’s permission, alleging in excuse his weak health and his want of the necessary training and experience; and Adam informed Robert de Thornham, custodian of the Cambridge ‘Custody,’ in which Norwich was situated, of the decision[445]. The appointments, like those of the Oxford lecturers, were in the hands of the Provincial Chapter, and the various convents obtained letters of recommendation from powerful patrons in support of their candidate[446]. The lecturer was appointed[Pg 66] for one year, and could be re-elected by the Provincial Chapter at the request of the convent[447]. Nor was it only to brethren of their own Order that the friars were sent. For many years a Franciscan was theological lecturer to the monks of Christchurch, Canterbury, till at length in 1314 one of his pupils was able to take his place. His teaching, wrote the monks, in grateful recollection of their ‘lector,’

Thus the friars disseminated over the country, from the universities outwards, the ‘New Learning’ of the thirteenth century.

But the fame of the Franciscan school at Oxford was not only English, but European[449]. Friars were sent thither to study not only from Scotland[450] and Ireland[451], but from France and Aquitaine[452], Italy[453], Spain[454], Portugal[455], and Germany[456]; while many of the Franciscan schools on[Pg 67] the Continent, both in universities and elsewhere[457], drew their teachers from England, and, in England, mainly from Oxford. Eccleston mentions a friar who studied with him at Oxford, where his lectures, after some failures, won the admiration of Grostete; afterwards, as his fame increased, he was called by the Minister-General to Lombardy, and enjoyed a great reputation even at the Papal court[458]. Grostete, on his return from the Council of Lyons, was anxious to get Adam Marsh out of the neighbourhood of Paris as soon as possible.

At another time[460] the General writes to the Provincial Minister of England, requesting him to send English friars to Paris to teach; it was probably on this occasion that Richard of Cornwall[461] left Oxford to win the applause of his hearers at Paris. Peckham received his early education in the schools of his Order at Oxford, and lectured at Paris and at the Court of Rome[462]. Among those whom the Oxford Convent[Pg 68] sent to teach in the universities of the Continent, were John Wallensis, William of Gainsborough, Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham[463]. All these names belong to the thirteenth or early fourteenth century; from that time onwards international jealousies and wars rendered the connexion of the English universities with Paris far less close, and contemporaneous with this breach was the beginning of the intellectual decline of the Order of St. Francis.

Oxford was the head of a ‘custody,’ which contained, according to the list given by Bartholomew of Pisa[464], seven other convents, namely, Reading, Bedford, Stamford (Linc.), Nottingham, Northampton, Leicester, and Grantham. What exactly the organization of a ‘custodia’ was, it is impossible to determine; it was probably always rather indefinite, and Bartholomew of Pisa points out that in early records the word is used very loosely[465]. Perhaps it was originally intended to hold chapters of custodies[466], as well as of provinces and convents. The Custodian had in early years the right of making and enforcing byelaws in his custody; thus

Each custody had its special characteristic, Oxford being chiefly remarkable for study[468]. Two Custodians of Oxford, Peter of Tewkesbury and John of Stamford, became Provincial Ministers[469]. At first the Wardens of the convents were appointed by the Custodian[470], but in 1240 the right of election was transferred to the convents themselves, and many friars at the same time demanded the total abolition of the Custodian’s office, on the ground that it was superfluous[471]. It continued however, to exist down to the Dissolution and seems to have implied a general right of supervision; the Custodian was a kind of permanent visitator[472].

[Pg 69]Several Provincial Chapters were held at Oxford. It was probably a Conventual, not a Provincial Chapter, before which Grostete, then ‘reading the act at the Friars Minors,’ preached his sermon in praise of poverty and mendicancy[473]. Here Albert of Pisa held his first chapter as Provincial Minister of England, and announced the stern principles which were to guide his government[474]. Soon after this Elias instituted a severe visitation throughout the Order, and sent Friar Wygmund or Wygred, a German, as visitor to England in 1237 or 1238[475]. He held chapters at London, Southampton, Gloucester, and Oxford[476]. At the latter place the Warden, Friar Eustace de Merc, was bitterly attacked and excluded a day and a half from the chapter, though his innocence seems to have been eventually established[477]. The inquisitorial methods adopted by the visitor raised a storm of opposition throughout the province, which found expression, on the completion of the visitation, in a Provincial Chapter held at Oxford in the summer or autumn of 1238[478]. Here a solemn appeal to Rome was formulated, and exemption claimed from all visitations, except those authorized by the General Chapter[479]. The result of this and similar appeals from the Order was the final deposition of Elias by the Pope on the 15th of May, 1239[480].

In the spring or early summer of 1248 the Minister-General, John of Parma, held a Provincial Chapter at Oxford,

Eccleston states that in the same chapter the Minister-General

For this chapter the King provided one cask of wine and the necessaries of life[483]. In 1289 three of the four Orders celebrated their Provincial Chapters at Oxford, that of the Minorites taking place on the feast of the Nativity of the Virgin (Sept. 8)[484]. No account of the proceedings remains.

The next Provincial Chapter at Oxford about which we have any information was held in 1405, at a critical period in the history of the Order in England. In 1404 ‘a great and very scandalous schism’ arose among the Franciscans owing to the arbitrary and unconstitutional conduct of the Provincial, John Zouch[485]. The friars appealed to the Protector of the Order, the Cardinal-bishop of Sabina, who appointed Friars Nicholas Fakenham and John Mallaert commissioners, with power to depose the Provincial, if necessary. The commissioners deposed him in his absence, called a chapter at Oxford on May 3rd[486], and proceeded to elect a successor. The Vicar of the Provincial forbade the friars to attend the chapter.

John Zouche was afterwards reinstated by the Protector of the Order, but does not seem to have ever made good his authority over the English Province[488].

[Pg 71]

CHAPTER VI.

RIVALRY BETWEEN THE ORDERS: ATTACKS ON THE FRIARS.

It was inevitable that a spirit of rivalry should exist between the two great Mendicant Orders; and the rivalry soon developed into antagonism. In the thirteenth century one lecturer to the Friars Minors at Oxford was removed from the convent, another was suspended from lecturing, for causing offence to the Friars Preachers and at their request[489]. An ‘enormous scandal of discord,’ in Matthew Paris’ words[490], arose in the year 1243, each of the two Orders claiming precedence of the other. Though there is little direct evidence on the point, there is no doubt that Oxford was one of the chief scenes of conflict. The controversy was carried on by ‘men of education and scholars[491],’ and some details of it are preserved in the pages of Eccleston. It arose from the proselytising tendencies of the two Orders[492]. The Dominicans, according to Eccleston[493],

Friar Albert of Pisa, when Provincial Minister of England, obtained a bull from Gregory IX prohibiting this practice:

The Dominicans on their side claimed similar privileges, and obtained a bull from Innocent IV to the effect that

Eccleston complains that the Dominicans made such good use of the bull that ‘they let scarcely any one go;’ and regards this equitable arrangement as a great hardship to his Order. ‘But not long,’ he adds, ‘did this tribulation last;’ Friars William of Nottingham and Peter of Tewkesbury obtained from Innocent IV a revocation of his constitution[496].

The antagonism between the two Orders did not stop here, and in many of the great questions of the day they are found on opposite sides. The Oxford Franciscans, as we have already seen, were among the staunchest supporters of Simon de Montfort; the Oxford Dominicans seem to have sided with the King. The famous Mad Parliament, which Henry III summoned to Oxford in 1258, met in the convent of the Black Friars, and Prince Edward and his retainers stayed there before the battle of Lewes[497].

The same rivalry made itself felt in the sphere of philosophy, and[Pg 73] the Franciscans dealt a heavy blow at their more orthodox adversaries by impugning successfully an important doctrine of Thomas Aquinas[498]. The Angelic Doctor had held with Aristotle and against Averroes that the individualising principle was not form but matter. How then, asked his opponents, could the individual exist in the non-material world[499]? Such a doctrine was in contradiction to the mediaeval theory of heaven and the life after death; and the Church rallied to the side of the Franciscans. At Oxford, Archbishop Kilwardby, Dominican though he was, condemned this among many other errors in 1276, but the sentence seems to have had little effect at the time[500]. It was chiefly against this opinion that Peckham’s measures in 1284 were directed[501]. If the Dominicans had allowed the aspersion cast on their greatest teacher to pass without serious protest when the condemnation came from one of themselves, they were anything but content to submit to the adverse judgment of one of their rivals. Peckham was attacked[Pg 74] both by the Provincial of the Black Friars in a congregation at Oxford[502] and in an anonymous pamphlet apparently by a Cambridge Dominican[503]—‘a cursed page and infamous leaf,’ as he describes it, ‘whose beginning is headless, whose middle malignant, and whose end foolish and formless.’ His action further involved the whole of the Franciscan Order in England in the storm. He was accused of ‘having sown discord between the Orders[504];’ and to defend himself against the charge of unduly favouring the Franciscans, he denied that he had consulted the latter on the subject and insisted on the previous condemnation of the same error by his predecessor[505]. He claimed to be actuated by no personal animus against the dead, whom he held in high honour and whom he had himself defended; his attack was directed against ignorant and arrogant men who presumed to teach what they did not know and to entice youths to the same errors. ‘We cannot and dare not,’ he urged, ‘fail to rescue our children, as far as we can, from the traps of error;’ and he forbade ‘curious theologians’ to defend the condemned doctrines in ‘the disputes of boys’ (in certaminibus puerilibus) at Oxford.

The question became a matter rather of feeling than of argument; the esprit de corps of the rival factions was involved, and the two Orders further estranged[506].

Peckham lost few opportunities of advancing the interests of the Mendicants at the expense of the monks and secular clergy, and of his brother Franciscans against the other Orders. The discipline and morals of the nuns of Godstow had suffered owing to the proximity of their house to the university-town, and the Archbishop, in his injunctions for the better government of the same, appointed two Friars Preachers and two Friars Minors (or four of each if necessary) as permanent confessors to the Convent[507]. In 1291 he wrote to the Prior of St. Frideswide’s urging him to confer the church of St. Peter le Bailey on some one devoted to the Friars Minors and[Pg 75] nominated by them[508]. While strenuously asserting the right of the Minorites to hear confessions in spite of the opposition of the parish priests[509], he forbade the Carmelites and Austin Friars at Oxford to hear any confessions of any persons whatsoever, regular or secular, clerk or lay, male or female, and ordered the Archdeacon, if they disobeyed, to pronounce public sentence of excommunication on them[510]. Arguing that ‘it was lawful to change a vow for a better one[511],’ he maintained that the Franciscans might, as they had hitherto done, admit members of other religious bodies to their Order; he would, he wrote to the Chancellor of the University of Oxford, himself admit them, if he were still Provincial Minister.

Peckham further, while condemning the erroneous opinions of the Dominicans at Oxford, denied the claim to superiority which they put forward[513]. The Franciscans claimed precedence on the ground of their humility (which of course dwindled in inverse ratio as their assertion of it grew), and of their absolute poverty. The Archbishop enunciated the formula which was condemned by the inquisitors and the Pope in the next century, and which formed, so to speak, the[Pg 76] text of the controversy, ‘De paupertate Christi.’ He defined the poverty of the apostles to be

the Minorites in following this example were in a state of ‘perfection,’ and lived a holier life than any other Order in the Church.

The claim was generally admitted, and led to the exaltation of the Minorites in the eyes of the world at the expense of the other Orders[515]. As early as 1269 a controversy on this point arose between the convents of the two Orders at Oxford. A Dominican named Solomon of Ingeham accused the Minorites of receiving money either with their own hands or through a third party[516]. The Franciscans denied the charge and demanded the punishment of Friar Solomon. The Dominicans asked them to prove the falsehood of Solomon’s assertion and promised then to punish him. ‘The burden of proof,’ replied the Franciscans, ‘lies with you who affirm, not with us who deny.’ The Dominicans brought forward many instances in which they maintained that the Minorites had actually received money. These, answered the latter, were merely personal transgressions, and affected the community no more than any case of carnal sin or disobedience. The Dominicans, however, based their contention mainly on the argument that money bequeathed to the Franciscans must be received either by them in person or by intermediaries on their behalf. The Minorites answered

[Pg 77]Peace was eventually restored by the interposition of the Chancellor and leading secular masters, at whose recommendation Friar Solomon withdrew his words. It is curious that neither the document containing the account of this quarrel, nor Peckham, mention the explanation which afterwards became the accepted theory, that the ownership of the goods of the Franciscans was vested in the Pope. Yet this explanation was originally given by Innocent IV in 1245[517].

As far as the bulk of the Franciscan Order was concerned, the controversy on ‘Evangelical Poverty’ was purely a theoretical one[518], its ultimate importance rather accidental than real. The claim to ‘this perfitnesse,’ as Daw Topias contemptuously calls it, rested not on fact but on a legal construction. The friars had only the use, not the proprietorship, of their lands and houses and goods. John XXII by his bull, ‘Ad conditorem canonum,’ issued on the 8th of December, 1322, and declaring that use was inseparable from proprietorship, withdrew from the Order the right of holding property in the name of the Roman See, and thus went far to destroy its theoretical claim to precedence. The whole Order, instead of the party of the Spirituales merely, was for a time banded against the Pope; and the dispute about a legal quibble became transformed under the hands of Ockham into an examination of the position and claims of the Papacy, and of the whole relation of Church and State.

Ockham probably studied at Oxford in his younger days, but it was no doubt later in life, and under the influence of Marsilius of Padua, that he developed the doctrines which made him ‘at once the glory and the reproach of his Order[519].’ In philosophy he had many followers at Oxford in the fourteenth century, and the Franciscan Convent was, like the rest of the University, divided on the questions of Nominalism and Realism[520]. The dispute concerning the poverty of Christ was not allowed to rest. It was this discussion which first brought the Archbishop of Armagh into open hostility to the friars[521]; and Wiclif [Pg 78]mentions the controversy as being still carried on between the two Orders in his time.

A great historian has said of the Middle Ages, that ‘at no time in the world’s history has theory, pretending all the while to control practice, been so utterly divorced from it[523].’ An extract from the Patent Rolls[524] will afford a striking illustration of the truth of these words as far as the learned Franciscans, the professors of evangelical poverty, are concerned. The date is February 22nd, 1378; the writ is issued in the King’s name.

It was probably the glaring contrast between the lofty claims of the friars and their actual life, rather than any inferiority in their morality as compared with the secular priests, which exposed them to the bitterest denunciations and taunts of the reformers. The Mendicants were far more in sympathy with the poor than were the endowed monks, and possessed far more than the parish priests the confidence of the people[525]. Wiclif recognised this fact, while he lamented it.

The first important attack on the friars in the fourteenth century was that led by Richard Fitzralph, Archbishop of Armagh. He had been Fellow of Balliol College before 1325 and Chancellor of the University in 1333[527]. While assailing the whole principle of mendicancy, his main charge against the friars, especially the friars at Oxford, was that of ‘stealing’ children, i.e. of secretly inducing them to enter the Mendicant Orders. In 1357 the Archbishop was cited to appear and defend himself before the Papal Court at Avignon; and on the 8th of November, in a solemn assembly of Pope and Cardinals, he made a great speech in defence of the parish priests against the Mendicants[528]. The Archbishop stated that, owing to the privileges of hearing confessions which the friars enjoyed, almost all youths in the Universities, and in the houses of their parents (in nearly all of which friars were to be found as ‘familiares’), had Mendicants as their confessors.

Parents were in consequence afraid to send their sons to the Universities, and preferred to keep them at home as tillers of the soil. While the numbers both of the friaries and of their inmates had enormously[Pg 80] increased, the number of secular students in every faculty decreased; the students at Oxford, who in his time were reckoned at 30,000, had now sunk to 6000.

Though these figures are of course preposterously exaggerated, and though the main cause of the diminution of the number of students was the Black Death, there can be no doubt of the essential truth of the accusation. In 1358 the University of Oxford passed a statute forbidding the admission of boys under eighteen to the Orders. The statute deserves to be quoted at length[530].

The friars did not deny the charge, but defended their conduct[531], and exerted themselves to the utmost to obtain a repeal of the statute. Their efforts were successful. While a suit which they had begun in the Roman Court was yet undecided, the Provincials of the four Orders laid their grievances before the King in Parliament[532]. In 1366 the obnoxious statute was formally annulled, on condition that the[Pg 81] friars’ suits at Rome and elsewhere against the University should cease[533]. The latter, however, did not abandon the struggle; its influence is probably to be seen in the petition of the Commons in 1402[534], that no one be allowed to enter any of the four Orders under the age of twenty-one years. The King’s answer was not favourable: he ordained merely that no friar should admit to his Order an infant under fourteen years without the assent of his father, mother, or guardians. The ordinance applied to the whole of England, and the petition of the Commons is a sign that the popularity of the friars had suffered under the attacks of Wiclif.

It has been clearly shown by recent criticism[535] that Wiclif’s enmity to the friars was confined to the last few years of his life. His earlier opponents were the monks—the religiosi possessionati. At one time he compares the poverty and mendicancy of St. Francis with the manual labour of St. Peter and St. Paul, in contrast with the possessions and worldly honours of the ecclesiastics of his time[536]. He seems to have been on terms of some intimacy with William Woodford, who may be regarded as the leader of the Oxford Minorites in their subsequent controversy with the reformer and his followers. Woodford relates[537] that

Wiclif had indeed many points of sympathy, especially on questions of ecclesiastical polity, with the Friars Minors. He was in agreement with them and in antagonism to the monks and many of the bishops, in the opinion that the tribute to the Pope should be refused, and that the secular power was, under some circumstances, justified in depriving the Church of its possessions[539]. Eight or nine years before Wiclif[Pg 82] wrote his famous tract in defence of the Parliament of 1366, an Oxford friar and doctor declared in his school that the King had the right of depriving ecclesiastics of their temporalities; he was ordered by Congregation to recant this and other opinions solemnly after a University sermon, and to pay 100s. to the University[540].

When, however, Wiclif began to call in question the Church’s doctrine on the Eucharist, he found himself in direct antagonism to the friars; and the quarrel, which began in a dogmatic difference in the schools[541], soon acquired a wider character. Wiclif’s accusations resolve themselves really into three[542]; firstly, that the friars upheld the ‘idolatrous’ doctrine of the Eucharist; secondly, that they maintained the theory of the mendicancy of Christ; thirdly, that they taught the people to rely for their salvation on letters of fraternity and prayers and masses, instead of on a good life; whence a general demoralization ensued.

It is improbable, however, that the indulgences granted by the friars differed from the other indulgences of the Middle Ages, which in theory absolved from the temporal punishment, not from the sin and eternal punishment. Wiclif may have classed with the friars the ‘pardoners’ who did not belong to any of the four Orders[544]. The records relating to the Franciscan house at Oxford throw no light on the matter, which indeed belongs to the general history of the Mendicants, not to the history of a particular convent. Wiclif’s charges amount practically to this: the friars were the foremost champions of the external, unspiritual form of religion, which he laboured to destroy: they were no longer leaders of thought, but obstacles to progress.

Though Wiclif’s writings, especially his English writings, are full of violent invective against the friars[545], it is difficult to find in them any definite accusations of the grosser forms of immorality. One instance will sufficiently illustrate the difference between Wiclif and his followers.

‘Jack Upland’ improves on this, and does not scruple to impute to the friars generally the vilest sins.

‘Your freres ben taken alle day
with wymmen and wifes,
bot of your privey sodomye
spake I not yette[547].’

At Oxford the seculars, always numerically strong and jealous of the regulars, rallied to Wiclif’s standard; while the Mendicants roused[Pg 84] the anger of the University by appealing to external authority. The friars were accused of having made use of their position as confessors to stir up the peasant revolt. On the 18th of February, 1382, the heads of the four Mendicant Convents at Oxford sent a letter to John of Gaunt, denying the charge and begging his protection[548]; all evils were attributed to them, and their lives were in danger. Their chief enemy was Nicholas Hereford. In Lent of the same year Hereford preached a University sermon at St. Mary’s, in which he argued that no ‘religious’ should be admitted to any degree at Oxford[549]. He was appointed by the Chancellor to deliver the principal English sermon of the year at St. Frideswide’s Cross on Ascension Day (May 15th), and used the opportunity to attack monks and friars and mendicancy in general[550]. On the 19th of the same month, the ‘Council of the Earthquake’ met at the Blackfriars in London, and condemned ten of Wiclif’s conclusions as heretical and fourteen as erroneous; among the seventeen doctors of divinity who took part in the council were four Minorites, the Oxford Franciscans being represented by Hugo Karlelle and Thomas Bernewell[551]. The Archbishop sent Peter Stokes, a Carmelite, to publish the condemnation at Oxford. The Chancellor and Proctors resented this interference with their rights, and the general feeling was strong in Wiclif’s favour. Stokes and his brethren went in fear of their lives; when the Carmelite ‘determined’ against Philip Repyngdon on the 10th of June, men were seen in the schools with arms concealed under their clothes. At length, on June 15th, the Chancellor was compelled, by the King’s command, to publish the condemnation of the twenty-four conclusions;

In November the University tried to turn the tables on its adversaries; in an assembly of the clerks at St. Frideswide’s, the Chancellor accused some of the orthodox party (among them a Minorite friar) of heresy[553]. But from this time the sacramental controversy tended to retire into the background, and the alliance of monks and friars, which Wiclif’s attack on the faith had called into being[554], came to an end. In 1392, Henry Crompe, a Cistercian monk, who had been a prominent opponent of Wiclif, was charged with having determined on several occasions against the right of the friars to hear confessions[555]. Friar John Tyssyngton and other Minorites took part in his condemnation in a Convocation held in the house of the Carmelites at Stamford. In their anxiety to silence their adversaries, the Mendicant Orders proved false to the tradition common to all the great mediaeval Universities—the tradition of intellectual freedom; they upheld the claim of Archbishop Arundel to visit the University, and lent their support to the rigid censorship which he established[556]. But it is only fair to remember that, years before this, the authority of the Church had been invoked against the teaching of the friars themselves. In 1368 Simon Langham sent thirty errors of the friars to the University, and it was enacted that no one should presume to defend or approve these tenets in the schools or elsewhere ‘on pain of the greater excommunication[557].’

The history of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries affords many other illustrations of the hostility with which the friars, and especially the Minorites, were regarded by the University. The subject of academical degrees, and of the action taken by the University against the ‘wax-doctors,’ has been treated elsewhere. A statute, which probably dates from the first half of the fifteenth century, provides that both the collatores of University sermons shall, if possible, be seculars[558]. Wood says that in the years 1423 and 1424 there

The chief offender, Friar William Russell, warden of the Greyfriars of[Pg 86] London, taught that tithes might be given arbitrarily, i.e. not to the parson legally entitled to them, but ‘for the pious use of the poor,’ according to the will of the giver. The University of Oxford condemned this doctrine and ordained that everyone taking a degree should formally abjure it: the oath, which remained in force till 1564, runs thus:—

For a similar offence another Franciscan, William Melton, D.D., was arrested at the instance of the University, and compelled to recant[560]. The Alma Mater kept a vigilant eye on her sons wherever they might be. In 1482 Friar Isaac Cusack, D.D., began to create disturbances in Ireland by preaching the old Franciscan doctrine of evangelical poverty; he was captured, sent to Oxford, and degraded and expelled the University as a vagabond and a heretic[561].

The feeling of nationality fostered by the long French wars was not without its influence on the friars in England and especially at the Universities. In 1369 the Chancellor caused a royal proclamation to be published at Carfax ordering all French students at Oxford, both religious and secular, to leave the kingdom[562]. In 1388 a royal writ was issued to the Warden of the Friars Minors in Oxford at the advice of the same convent, warning him to admit no foreign friars who might reveal to the enemy ‘the secrets and counsel of our kingdom,’ and to expel any such friars for whose good behaviour he would not be responsible, or who would not pray or celebrate masses for the King and the good estate of the realm[563].

Among the many problems presented by the reign of Richard II, not the least obscure is the passionate loyalty with which the Franciscans regarded his memory[564]. Yet Richard II and his councillors[Pg 87] were suspected of Lollardy, while his successor posed as the champion of orthodoxy. Henry IV, however, derived his support chiefly from the wealthy ecclesiastics, and the Lollardy of the Court of Richard II was rather political than dogmatic; the opinions prevalent at the Court were more in consonance with Wiclif’s earlier teaching and with the teaching of the Franciscan Order on the need of poverty in the Church and the evils of its endowments, than with the Lollard doctrine of the Eucharist. In the early years of Henry IV the Franciscans were active in organizing conspiracies[565]; the pulpit and the confessional were used to spread disaffection against the new monarch[566]; and the failure of his campaigns was attributed to the magical arts of the Friars Minors[567]. In 1402, eight Minorites of the convent of Leicester were seized, and convicted on their own admission of having organized an armed revolt to find King Richard and restore him to the throne[568]. They were condemned to be hanged and decapitated at Tyburn, and the sentence was carried out in the sight of many thousands without any ecclesiastical protest. One of these friars was Roger Frisby, an old man and Master in Theology[569]. On the Vigil of the feast of St. John the Baptist[570]—the very day on which the rebels were to meet ‘in the plain of Oxford,’ his head was taken from London Bridge and brought to Oxford;

While subject to attacks from without, the Franciscan Order suffered from rival factions within. The long-standing division between[Pg 88] the lax or Conventual, and the strict or Observant parties, at length received formal recognition in the Council of Constance (1415) when the Observants were constituted a semi-independent branch under a Vicar-General[572]. How did this arrangement affect Oxford as a studium generale? The Observants as a body produced few students; the reformed houses on the Continent objected to send their brethren to Paris[573]. A few foreign Observants found their way to Oxford in the fifteenth century[574]; and when later in the century Observant friaries were founded in England[575], some of their members studied in the Conventual house at the University[576]. Whether any part of the Convent was set apart for them is unknown: according to all appearance, the brethren of both branches lived together in peace and goodwill.

[Pg 89]

CHAPTER VII.

ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE FRIARS’ MANNER OF LIFE AND MEANS OF LIVELIHOOD: BENEFACTORS.

Of the internal economy of the Franciscan house at Oxford, or indeed of any friary in England, little is known or ever can be known. The Registrum Fratrum Minorum Londoniae is, in Brewer’s words, ‘the only work of the kind extant. A painful proof, if such were needed, of the utter devastation committed when the Franciscan convents were dissolved, and their libraries dispersed[577].’ We may here give some account of the records which must once have existed in every Franciscan house or province. From the earliest times an annual compotus[578] or balance-sheet of income and expenditure was drawn up, and if in later days this was sometimes omitted, an ex-warden was always liable to be called to render an account to his successor[579]. In each convent would also be kept a list of the brethren who died there[580]; and lists both of living benefactors and of dead, for whose souls prayers or masses were to be said[581], while many in their[Pg 90] lifetime received ‘letters of confraternity[582].’ In the decrees of the General Chapter of Paris in 1292 it is commanded[583] that each minister should have the lives and acts of holy friars carefully collected in his province and entered in special registers, and bring them to the General Chapter; also that all notable excesses of friars, grave crimes, and credible accusations, the sentences passed and punishments inflicted on the offenders, should be noted in books kept for the purpose, preserved in the archives of the province, and faithfully handed on to each succeeding minister. The acts of Provincial Chapters were also kept[584]. Of these and similar records we have, besides the London register already alluded to, only a few letters of fraternity[585]. Of English Franciscan records originated by or relating to the convent at Oxford, not one (unless the list of lectors and the account of the controversy with the Dominicans in 1269[586] can be called records) is known to exist[587]. Any account, therefore, of the internal life of the convent must be meagre and unsatisfactory in the highest degree.

The hours and numbers of daily services seem to have differed little, if at all, from those observed in other monastic institutions[588]. We may therefore omit this subject and treat of the points which receive additional elucidation from documents relating to Oxford.

[Pg 91]The first means of livelihood of the Mendicant Friars was naturally begging. Certain of the brethren were appointed by the Warden to ‘procure’ food for the convent during some fixed period[589]. There were no definite rules as to how many friars should be sent as ‘procuratores’ or ‘limitors’[590]; the details depended on the necessities of the convent and the will of the Superior[591]. Each house had definite ‘limits’ assigned to it, within which its members might beg[592]. The friars went two and two, accompanied by a servant or boy[593] who carried the offerings, which were usually in kind. The friar in Chaucer’s ‘Sompnoure’s Tale,’ himself a ‘maister[594]’ in the schools, after preaching in the church went round the village—

‘In every hous he gan to pore and prye
And beggyd mele or chese, or ellis corn[595].’

A good deal of private begging was done by the student friars to obtain the means of study[596]. Roger Bacon appealed to his brother in England, to his powerful and wealthy acquaintances, for money to carry out the commands of the Pope[597].

Begging of this kind would either be unauthorized or legalized by special license. The statutes of the Order[599] enact that every convent shall have its ‘procurator’ or ‘syndicus,’ who shall transact all the legal business of the house and receive in the name of the Roman Church for the use of the friars all pecuniary alms and bequests, or all such alms and bequests as can be changed into money. The express object of these constitutions was to

It would appear that at Oxford in the fourteenth century the office of alms-collector was held by one of the brethren. This conclusion, however contrary to the spirit and letter of the statutes, seems warranted by a remarkable legal document of the year 1341[601]. It is the record of a suit in the Hustings Court, in which Friar John of Ochampton, Warden of the Friars Minors at Oxford, ‘through Friar John de Hentham his attorney,’ charged ‘Richard de Whitchford minor[602],’ with refusing to render an account of the sums received by him when he was ‘receiver of pence of the said warden,’ and with embezzling sixty shillings or more, which he obtained from various people on the Monday after the feast of St. Michael, 1340. Two of the sums are specified, namely, one mark by the hands of Richard, servant of John de Couton, and 12s. by the hands of Thomas of London. The Warden claimed to have suffered loss to the extent of one hundred shillings; Richard de Whitchford could not deny the receipt of the money, but on his request the court appointed two auditors, Richard Cary and John le Peyntour; to these he rendered an[Pg 93] account, and was found to be sixty shillings in arrears; ‘and,’ the record continues, ‘as he cannot make satisfaction he is committed to prison.’

In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the Oxford friars sometimes employed laymen to represent them in the courts[603]; sometimes the Warden appeared in person[604], but most of the legal business in the Chancellor’s court at Oxford was undertaken by one of the brethren. From 1507 or before, to the Dissolution, this duty was entrusted to Friar Brian Sandon. His name does not occur in the University Register, and he was, though a priest[605], probably not a student; indeed, his administrative business would hardly have left him time for other occupations. Between 1507 and 1516 and between 1527 and 1534, he appears as plaintiff or defendant in some fifteen suits in the Chancellor’s court[606]. Some of these afford glimpses into the life of the friars. On the 26th of March, 1512[607], Father Brian instituted an action against John Morys, his proctor, alleging that the latter

and on April 5th John Morys was committed to prison ‘at the instance of the provost (preposeti) of the friars minors for a debt[608].’

But if the friars did not grow corn, they seem to have made use of their meadows as pasture land. On the 20th of May, 1529[609], Friar Brian sued Margery, widow of John Lock, for 7s. 8d.,

Eventually the case was submitted to the arbitration of William Clare the elder, and Edmund Irishe, bailiffs of Oxford, with the addition of a third if necessary, each party binding itself to abide by the decision of the majority under penalty of 40s., in case of disagreement, to be paid to the party willing to accept the judgment.

While these and similar actions were instituted by Brian in fulfilment of the duties of his position, he was undoubtedly engaged in others of a private nature. At one time he acts as attorney for a[Pg 94] priest[610]. At another he is charged with wrongfully keeping a knife, the property of dominus Galfred Coper[611]. In 1531[612] he had a dispute with his tailor and appealed to the law, alleging

Brian having declared on oath that he had supplied the above-mentioned amount of cloth, Gos promised to give him 14d. as satisfaction for the missing quarter of a yard. But later in the day he again appeared and charged the friar with perjury. After some more recriminations an agreement was come to out of court, and we hear no more of the habit.

That his litigious spirit should sometimes have brought Friar Brian into trouble we cannot wonder. Several times in the latter part of his career he was in danger of ‘bodily injury;’ in 1532[614] he made application to have Robert Holder bound over to keep the peace, and in 1534 the judge ordered that James Penerton should not be released from Bocardo till he found sufficient sureties that he would not inflict bodily harm on Friar Brian or his friends (familiaribus)[615]. The same year he complained of having been libelled by one Giles Mawket, a carpenter (fabro lignario), in the parish of St. Ebbe’s[616]. This was probably a slander on his character, which was not above suspicion. In 1535[617] ‘a woman of Radley named Anna’ asserted in the Commissary’s court that she was with child by Thomas Denson, Bachelor of Laws:

The records of the Chancellor’s court contain charges of immorality against two other Friars Minors[619]. The first was ‘dompnus’ Robert[Pg 95] Beste[620], who was summoned before the court together with a scholar of Broadgates Hall,

apparently while his case was considered. It does not appear what the charge against him was, or what (if any) further steps were taken[621]. His companion was warned to moderate his attentions to the same Joanna, wife of William Cooper or Cowper, of St. Ebbe’s, who appeared in the trial above referred to.

Joanna seems to have taken a special interest in the Minorites. At the end of 1533[622] Friar Arthur, B.D., appealed to the court to stop her spreading evil reports against him, which she had failed to prove; she was ordered to abstain in future

But if Friar Arthur was innocent, he was peculiarly unfortunate. A few months later[623] he again appealed for protection against the libels of Nicholas Andrews and John Poker, scholars of Peckwater’s Inn. At this time Dr. Baskerfeld, Warden of the Grey Friars, was acting as substitute for the Commissary, and he heard the case in the house of the Minorites. The accusation has been carefully obliterated in the Chancellor’s book, evidently by the friars themselves, but the gist of it can be deciphered.

Friar Arthur strenuously denied the accusation, and the court adjourned[Pg 96] for two hours. When it reassembled, the defendants refused to submit to Dr. Baskerfeld’s jurisdiction, arguing that he was incompetent to decide a case in which one of the members of his convent was so deeply implicated. Two days later, however, they confessed before the judge that they would not swear to their original statement, and both sides promised to forgive and forget the whole matter.

Though none of these charges was actually proved, we must admit that they show that the convent was not in a healthy state on the eve of the Dissolution. There is certainly no trace of the religious fervour by which even in the latter days some of the Observant convents were honourably distinguished. We find the brethren at Oxford engaged in money transactions, lending[625] and borrowing[626], ‘buying and selling[627].’ Friar John Arter[628] kept a horse in the town and raised difficulties about the bill; Randulph Craycoke or Cradoc, who had charge of the horse, would not part with it till he had received ‘about ten shillings for food and grass,’ which sum the friar refused to pay, asserting that Randulph had worked the horse himself (laboravit dictum equum diversis (?) oneribus). The court, to which the disputants appealed, reduced the amount by 2s.; but Arter was probably unable to pay: no one appeared at the time appointed to claim the animal, ‘so we sent Cradoc away with the horse until his bill should be paid.’

The Warden, Friar Edward Baskerfeld, D.D., was plaintiff in a somewhat similar case[629], in which both sides were represented by counsel. In his evidence the friar deposed that he had lent Master Richard Weston, LL.B.,

[Pg 97]The parties agreed to submit the dispute to the judgment of three arbitrators, and the result does not appear in the records of the court.

No doubt some of the friars had private incomes and emoluments of their own[631] (apart from the allowance or ‘exhibition’ which as students they still received from their native convents or from benefactors); and some may have lived outside the walls of their monastery[632]. But the convent itself was very poor; the love of many had waxed cold, and it was inevitable that in order to get a livelihood they should resort to means forbidden by their Rule.

At the beginning of the sixteenth century[633], the Warden, Dr. Goodefyld, leased one of the gardens lying within the boundaries of the convent to Richard Leke, brewer of Oxford. The terms of the agreement are unknown, but the friars thought them—or Leke’s interpretation of them, very injurious to their interests, and in 1513 and 1514 demanded the repudiation of the contract. Feeling ran very high, and Leke was in personal danger; the Warden was bound over to keep the peace, and promised

Again the case was referred to arbitration and the decision is unknown. It is interesting to find that Leke was fully reconciled to the friars before his death[634].

The poverty of the brethren was aggravated by the irregularity with which payments, on which they might justly reckon, were made. One of their chief sources of income was a royal grant of 50 marcs per annum during the King’s pleasure, to be paid in equal portions at Easter and Michaelmas. It was first instituted by Edward I[635] in 1289,[Pg 98] and was continued by all the kings (with the exception of Edward V) to the Dissolution[636]. Sometimes the sum was paid direct from the treasury; but often (and this seems to have been the general custom as regards royal benefactions to religious houses) a sheriff or other officer was held responsible for the payment; either he was instructed to send the requisite amount to the Exchequer, or he paid the money directly; and the sums which he paid were accredited to him when he produced his accounts at the sessions of the Exchequer. As may be proved by many instances, the system did not conduce to regularity of payment. Edward II, in December 1313, ordered Richard Kellawe, Bishop of Durham[637], ‘to send to our exchequer at Westminster within fifteen days of the day of St. Hilary,’ ten marks in partial satisfaction of the grant[638]. But though this sum was to be the first charge on the arrears in the Durham diocese of the tax of one-half of their income[639] imposed on the clergy by Edward I (A. D. 1294), and though writs were repeatedly[640] issued to enforce payment, we find that on the 4th of June, 1315, nothing had been done, ‘unde vehementer admiramur[641].’

The fifty marks were never made a definite fixed charge on the revenues of any one county nor were they levied year by year as a single sum; each year some sheriff or bishop was made responsible for a fraction of the whole amount. The annuity was on several occasions in arrear. Thus Henry IV in the first year of his reign granted the friars ‘of his abundant favour’ (de uberiori gratia nostra) all the arrears that had accumulated during the reign of his predecessor[642]. Affairs of State made themselves felt in the Franciscan convent. In 1450 Parliament passed a general act of resumption, annulling all[Pg 99] grants made since the King’s accession, and the annuity to the friars ceased to be paid[643]. The brethren represented to Henry VI the hardships which this loss of revenue inflicted on them, and in 1453 the King ordered the arrears to be paid,

Under the circumstances we cannot be surprised if the friars sometimes took legal measures to recover the debts due to them. It was no doubt in connexion with this grant, that in 1466 Richard Clyff, ‘custos’ of the Oxford Grey Friars (first in person and afterwards through his attorney) sued John Broghton, late Sheriff of Kent, in the Court of Exchequer, for 100s. due to him from the preceding year, and claimed damages to the amount of ten marks[645]. In 1488, in like manner, Richard Salford, Warden of the Friars Minors at Oxford, applied to the Barons of the Exchequer to compel John Paston, Knt., late Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, to pay a debt of £10 18s., and put in a claim to £10 damages; he recovered the debt, but the damages were reduced to 26s. 8d.[646] On the same day he sued Edmund Bedyngfeld, Knt., late Sheriff of the same counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, for a debt of ‘seven pounds of silver’ and 100s. damages; the amount of the debt and 20s. damages were awarded him[647]. The next year he again brought an action against the same Bedyngfeld and recovered the debt (£4 2s.), while the barons assessed his damages at 10s. instead of the £4 which he claimed[648]. We gather from these instances that though the annuity was usually paid and was not often much in arrear, it was not collected without considerable trouble and expense on the part of the friars. These actions involved a journey to London and the employment of an attorney[649]: they were never settled in one day, and weeks or months elapsed between the first hearing and the second.

The Grey Friars were also in receipt of annual or weekly alms[Pg 100] from others besides the King. Durham College paid them 50s. yearly[650].

The nunnery of Godstow[652] gave every week alternately to the Friars’ Preachers and Minors

The nuns also gave annually to each of the four Orders of friars at Oxford 3s. 4d. in money, and ‘one peck (modium) of oytemell and one of peas (pisarum) in Lent.’ Among the ‘perpetual alms’ of Osney Abbey is mentioned a grant of 20s. to the four Orders, as the price of one ox, at Christmas, and of 4d. a week to each Order ‘according to ancient custom[653].’

A large part of their revenue was derived from bequests. To minister to the sick and the dying was one of the first duties which St. Francis practised himself and enjoined on his followers: that in this respect the English Franciscans followed his precepts may be seen in the tradition of them which remained in the memory of this country and which Shakespeare has expressed in ‘Romeo and Juliet’:

‘Going to find a barefoot brother out,
One of our order, to associate me,
Here in this city visiting the sick,
And finding him, the searchers of the town,
Suspecting that we both were in a house
Where the infectious pestilence did reign,
Seal’d up the doors and would not let us forth.’
(Act V, Scene II.)

But work like this receives little notice in history, and where it is mentioned it is usually upon the sordid aspect of the case—the greed for legacies—that the chroniclers insist.

In connexion with Oxford there are perhaps in the extant records only two instances of a Franciscan being found in the chamber of sickness or death. On Nov. 24, 1357, the will of Robert de Trenge[654],[Pg 101] Warden of Merton, was proved by the sworn testimony of Friar John of Nottingham of the Order of Friars Minors, and Master Walter Moryn, clerk. The will itself is dated June 14, 1351, but in the Middle Ages it was rarely that a man made his will until he felt that his hours were numbered, and although Robert de Trenge seems to have lived some time longer, he was probably now lying in expectation of death, struck down perhaps by the dreaded plague.

The other instance is of later date, namely 10th Dec., 1514[655]. A scholar, John Eustas, had died intestate at Oxford;

A few days later Friar Richard Lorcan was ordered by the court to restore these goods under penalty of the law[656].

It is, however, in the wills of men and women of every rank and every status that we get most insight into the work of the friars as visitors of the sick. Unfortunately we possess but few wills as early as the thirteenth or first half of the fourteenth century, while for the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, when the popularity of the friars had greatly declined, they are fairly numerous. Taking those proved in the Chancellor’s court between 1436 and 1538, we find that one will in every eight, roughly speaking[657], contains a bequest to the Minorites. In the ‘Old White Book’ (Oxford City Records)[658], the proportion is about one to every four or five, and in the last half of the fourteenth century, one-third of the wills of Oxford citizens contain bequests to the Franciscans; and these figures are borne out by the Oxford wills scattered through the early Registers at Somerset House[659]. The legacies come from all ranks; tradesmen and[Pg 102] merchants being especially well represented. Nor were the benefactors confined to Oxford and its neighbourhood: the Convent, like the University, occupied a national position. But it will be best to give as complete a list as possible of the bequests to the Grey Friars, and leave readers to draw their own conclusions.

John of St. John[660], clerk, by an undated will, probably about 1230, left half a mark to the Friars Minors of Oxford.

Martin de Sancta Cruce, Master of the Hospital of Sherburn, near Durham, left 10s. to them in 1259, with bequests to Friar Richard of Cornwall and others[661].

Boniface of Savoy, Archbishop of Canterbury, left them fifteen marks at his death in 1270[662].

Nicholas de Weston, citizen of Oxford, left them 10s. in 1271[663].

Walter de Merton, Bishop of Rochester, Chancellor of England, and founder of Merton College, bequeathed twenty-five marks to them at his death in 1277[664].

Thomas Waldere, of Wycombe, left them 2s. in 1291[665].

Amaury de Montfort[666], papal chaplain, Treasurer of York, &c. in an elaborate will dated Feb. 2nd, 1300/1, ordered that ‘the goods and revenues of the aforesaid Treasury owed to him’ should be divided into three parts; one-third was to be subdivided into six parts; the sixth part was to be again subdivided into three parts, one of which was to go to the Friars Preachers of Oxford, Leicester, and elsewhere; the second

the third, to pay any debts he might leave. As Amaury was dispossessed of the Treasurership in Aug. 1265 (after holding it only for a few months), and never recovered it, these bequests were merely a pious wish.

John de Doclington bequeathed 20s. to each of the four Orders in Oxford in 1335[667].

Nicholas Acton[668], parson of the church of Wystantowe (Salop), and owner of property in London, left the Oxford Franciscans 40s. in 1337.

William de Burchestre left them one marc in 1340[669].

John son of Walter Wrenche, of Milton, spicer, by a will dated May 4th, and proved on May 5th, 1349, gave to the Friars Preachers and Friars Minors of Oxford each ten quarters of corn[670].

Edmund Bereford[671], lord of several manors near Oxford, in his will dated Jan. 8th, 1350/1 and proved in 1354, gave, among many other pious bequests, 20s. at his death and 10s. on his anniversary to the Minorites.

Henry Malmesbury, citizen of Oxford, left them 20s. in 1361[672].

John de Bereford[673], citizen and sometime Mayor of Oxford, bequeathed 13s. 4d. to each of the Orders in 1361,

Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex (who died 1361), devised

[Pg 104]Richard Bramptone, butcher of Oxford, in 1362, left 10s. to be divided equally among the four Orders of friars[675].

Walter de Berney[676], a wealthy citizen of London, with apparently no near relations, was a benefactor: his will, made in 1377, contains, among many similar bequests, the following:

Richard Carsewell, butcher of Oxford, in 1389 left the house in which he lived, ‘without the South Gate of Oxford toward Grantpounde,’ to his executors, with instructions to sell it

John Ocle or Okele, of Oxford, ‘skinner,’ left in 1390, 20s. a year for three years to Friar John Schankton, of the Order of Minors, to celebrate masses for the soul of the testator and his friends, in the Franciscan church at Oxford. To the convent of Friars Minors he bequeathed 5s., to celebrate divine service for him on the day or the morrow of his death[678].

Sir John Golafre, of Langley and Fyfield, knight, by will dated Jan. 19th, 1393/4, left the Minorites £10, if he were buried in their church:

Richard de Garaford, of Oxford, who was buried in the Dominican cemetery, left the Friars Minors 6s. 8d. in 1395[680].

John de Waltham, Bishop of Salisbury, left them 6s. 8d. in the same year ‘to pray specially for his soul[681].’

John Maldon, Provost of Oriel, left 3s. 4d. to each of the Mendicant Orders at Oxford in 1401[682].

John Bannebury, of Oxford, left 40d. to the Grey Friars in 1401[683].

Matthew Coke, of Oxford, in the same year, bequeathed 30s. to be[Pg 105] divided among the Orders of friars, ‘to celebrate for my soul,’ and added the hope:

John Thomas, priest, left by will made at Oxford 1413, 10s. to the Friars Minors there,

Lady Alienora de Sancto Amando in 1426 left £8 to be divided amongst the four Orders at Oxford ‘to celebrate for her soul[686].’

Robert James, Esq., lord of Borstall, left 6s. 8d. to each Order at Oxford in 1431[687].

Agnes, wife of Michael Norton[688], in 1438 willed to be buried in the Minorite church at Oxford, and gave instructions that her tenement in St. Ebbe’s should be sold and that

James Hedyan, LL.B., and Principal of Eagle Hall, in 1445 bequeathed 8s. to the Franciscans, in whose church he was buried, and 20d. to Friar Giles (his Franciscan confessor?)[689].

Reginald Mertherderwa, doctor of laws and rector of the parish of St. Crida the Virgin in the diocese of Exeter, in 1447 left 6s. 8d. to each of the four Mendicant Orders at Oxford; and to the convent of Friars Minors

William Skelton, clerk, rector of the parish of St. Vedast, London, left the Minorites 3s. 4d. in the same year[691].

Walter Morleyse, ‘de alta Sebyndon,’ Co. Wilts, left them 5s. (1451)[692].

Richard Browne, alias Cordon[693], LL.D. and Archdeacon of Rochester, Canon of York, Wells, etc., provides in his will dated 1452, that if he dies in or near Oxford, every Order of friars there shall have one noble (6s. 8d.)

William Lord Lovell[694] made arrangements before his death ‘to be buried at the Grayfreris of Oxenford;’ (will dated 18 March, 1454/5, proved Sept. 1, 1455). In the arrangements a bequest would no doubt be included.

Master Philip Polton, Archdeacon of Gloucester (buried in All Souls Chapel), left 40d. to each Order of friars of Oxford by will dated 1461[695].

John Dongan in 1464 desired to be buried ‘in the cemetery of the Friars Minors of the University of Oxford,’ to whom he gives 40d.[696]

John Russel, of Holawnton, Wilts, made his will in 1469[697].

William Dagvyle, gentleman, left 30s. to the five Orders of friars at Oxford in 1474[698].

William Chestur, ‘marchaunte of the staple of Caleys and Citezein and Skynnere of London,’ bequeathed in 1476[699],

Robert Abdy, Master of Balliol College, left £4 to the four Orders of friars at Oxford in 1483[700].

Alice Dobbis, ‘wif of John Dobbis of y^e town of Oxenford Alderman,’ gave and bequeathed 6s. 8d. to the ‘ffreris Minours’ in 1488[701].

James Blacwode, of Oxford, in 1490 left to the Minorites there ‘V^s et unum Gublet de Argento pouncede[702].’

Master John Martoke, elected Fellow of Merton College in 1458, left each Order of friars at Oxford 6s. 8d. (will executed 1500, proved 1503)[703].

Margaret Goldsmith in 1503 left 13s. 4d. to be divided among the four Orders[704].

[Pg 107]Thomas Banke, Rector of Lincoln College, willed in 1503

John Pereson (buried at St. Mary Magdalen), left the four Orders 13s. 4d. in 1507[706].

In the same year, Thomas Clarke, the executor of the will of John Falley, promised to pay Dr. Kynton, Minorite, 26s. 8d. in four instalments[707].

Edmund Crofton, M.A., who made bequests to Brasenose College and the convents of St. Frideswide, Osney, and Rewley, left 26s. 8d. to the four Orders (1508)[708].

William Hasard, of Magdalen College, Proctor of the University in 1495, by a will dated 19th Aug. 1509 and proved 31st Aug. of the same year, bequeathed 10s. to each house of friars,

‘Richard ffetiplace, of Estshifford[710] (Berks) Squyer,’ made a will in 1510 containing the entry:

‘Dame Elizabeth Elmys of Henley upon Thamys’ in 1510 left to each of the four Orders in Oxford, if she died in that neighbourhood, 10s. for a trental, &c.

‘Sebyll Danvers,’ widow, of Waterstoke, in the diocese of Lincoln and county of Oxford, in 1511 left the four Orders 13s. 4d. to be divided equally among them[712].

Thomas Dauys, of St. Edwardstowe, Worcester diocese, in 1511 gave in his will

William Perot, of Lambourne, Salisbury diocese, in 1511 left to the ‘Grey freres of Oxon xxd.[714]’

[Pg 108]Richard Harecourt, Esquire, of Abingdon, left 26s. 8d. to the four Orders in Oxford in 1512[715].

William Besylis, Esquire, in 1515 bequeathed ‘to the grey ffryers in Oxenfford vjs. viijd.’[716]

Robert Throkmorton, Knight, willed in 1518[717], that

Sir Richard Elyot, ‘Knyght, one of the Kinges Justices of his commen benche,’ willed in 1520, that the four Orders at Oxford and elsewhere,

John Tynmouth, Franciscan friar, Bishop of Argos, Suffragan of Sarum, and parson of Boston, left to the Grey Friars of Oxford £5: the will was made in 1523, and proved in 1524[719].

In 1526 Richard Leke or Leek[720], ‘late bruer of Oxford,’ bequeathed 4d. to each Grey friar of Oxford being a priest, and 2d. to each ‘being noo prest;’ 6s. 8d. to the friars ‘to make a dyner in their owne place;’ 6s. 8d. to the Warden ‘to prouide for the premisses;’ 20s. for altars; and an additional 10s. to be paid in three instalments, namely, ‘at my burying,’ ‘at my monethes mynde,’ and ‘at my yeres mynde.’

Walter Curson, of Waterperry[721], ‘gentilman,’ bequeathed a legacy in these terms:

John Rogers (Exeter College) in 1527 also bequeathed each Order 10s.[722]

John Coles (1529), left the four Orders 13s. 4d. (his executors were M.A.’s)[723].

[Pg 109]John Seman, of Oxford, by will dated 1529, gave

Anthony Hall, of Swerford, a considerable landowner, desired in his will dated 1529 and proved 1530, to

John Byrton, of ‘Abburbury,’ also a farmer or landowner, left in 1530 to the four Orders at Oxford 4s.[726]

Thomas Goodewyn, of Alkerton (Oxon), a large sheepfarmer, bequeathed 2s. 8d. to the ‘gray ffryers of Oxford,’ in 1530[727].

In 1532 William Clare, of Hollywell, Oxford, left 3s. 4d. to each Order of friars at Oxford[728].

Jane Foxe, of Burford, in 1535 bequeathed her lands and tenements and ‘ii c (200) shepe’ to her son, and 5s. 8d. ‘to the iiij order of frears in Oxford[729].’

Henry Standish[730], Friar Minor, and Bishop of St. Asaph, in 1535 bequeathed

ten marks to the church of the same friars, £40 for the exhibition of scholars[731] in the University of Oxford, and £40 to build an aisle in the church of the friars Minors at Oxford.

Thomas Sowche, of ‘Spellusbury,’ left to the ‘fore orders of freers in Oxford, euery one of them iiijd.[732]’

Richard Elemens or Elemeus, of ‘Welleford’ (Berkshire?), in 1536 left ‘vnto the Gray freers yn Oxford xs.[733]’

John Claymond, S.T.B., President first of Magdalen College, then of Corpus Christi College, left 20s. to each of the convents of friars at Oxford in 1536,

[Pg 110]Elizabeth Johnson, of Oxford, widow, in 1537 left

The will was proved on Jan. 12th, 1538/9,—after the suppression of the friaries[735].

Many testators authorized their executors to make due provision of trentalls and masses ‘for the wealth of their souls,’ without specifying where they were to be celebrated: the friars no doubt came in for a share of these. Thus Thomas Hoye, Vicar of Bampton, in 1531 gives the following instructions[736]:

On the other hand, the parish priests or rectors of churches were legally entitled to one-fourth of the gifts, bequests, and fees given by their parishioners to the friars[737]: but it is impossible to say whether the right was generally enforced. In 1521 Leo X,

exempted the friars from the payment[738].

Among other sources of revenue may be enumerated the institution of annual masses for fees (of which the wills often make mention), commutations of penances for money[739], payment by the University and others for the use of their church, schools, and other buildings on various occasions[740], and collections in church[741]. At the beginning of the sixteenth century we hear of a

which no doubt supported one or more friars to say mass in one of[Pg 111] the ten chapels. Of manual labour there is little evidence; the only kind mentioned is the transcription of manuscripts of which we have already spoken.

We may here say a few words on two other points. Firstly, from what classes of society were the Franciscans mainly drawn? In the thirteenth century a very large number of men of position, of high birth, were attracted to the Order; but that this was unusual may be gathered from the rejoicings which took place over converts who were ‘valentes in saeculo[743].’ There is every reason to suppose that the Grey Friars, as well as the other students at the University, were mainly recruited from the sons of tradesmen, artisans, and villeins[744]. Friar Brackley, D.D. was the son of a Norwich dyer[745]; and the towns probably supplied the greater proportion of the Oxford Franciscans[746]. Secondly, what led men to take the vows of the Minorites? Excluding again the thirteenth century (when the highest motives were predominant), and confining ourselves to the later times, we must admit that, apart from those who entered the Order as boys, either from choice or at the instigation or compulsion of relatives[747]—the leading motive was a superstitious belief in the externals of religion, in the efficacy of ‘the washing of cups and pots.’ How strong this feeling was may be seen from the fact that Latimer was at one time in danger of yielding to it.

[Pg 112]

CHAPTER VIII.

THE DISSOLUTION.

The intellectual torpor which oppressed Oxford for more than a century after the disappearance of Wiclif and his followers was due less to the repressive measures adopted by Archbishop Arundel, than to the want of vitality, of adaptability to new modes of thought, in the scholastic philosophy and method, with which the intellectual life of Oxford had for so long been identified. The University as a whole did not extend a warm welcome to the New Learning, and it was to be expected that the Mendicant Orders especially should be attached to the old state of things, with which their past greatness was connected, and to which their present position and any prestige they still possessed were due[749]. The Grey Friars consequently were inclined to oppose the revival of learning; and Tyndale no doubt classed them among ‘the old barking curs, Duns’ disciples and like draff called Scotists, the children of darkness,’ who ‘raged in every pulpit against Greek, Latin, and Hebrew[750].’ Dr. Henry Standish, sometime Warden of the Grey Friars of London and Provincial Minister of England, attacked Erasmus’ version of the[Pg 113] New Testament in a sermon at Paul’s Cross and in conversation at Court, and seems to have been the recognised leader of the ‘Trojan’ party in England[751]. But even among the Minorites there are traces of the influence of the Renaissance. Another Provincial Minister, Richard Brynkley, was a student of Greek, and was supplied with a copy of the Gospels in Greek from the Franciscan Library at Oxford. Friar Nicholas de Burgo seems to have been one of that band of Humanists whom Wolsey attracted to Oxford, that they might propagate in his own University the learning and culture of Italy[752].

The close historical relation, notwithstanding the fundamental differences, between the intellectual movement and the religious movement, was neatly expressed in a saying current among the friars: ‘Erasmus laid the egg; Luther hatched it[753].’ The beginnings of the English Reformation in its religious aspect are to be sought among the educated classes, especially at Cambridge. The Minorites, while generally hostile to the new religion[754], did not take a leading part in suppressing it. And when it is remembered how very little progress the Lutheran doctrines made in England before the Dissolution, the few instances of sympathy with those doctrines recorded in the lives of Oxford Franciscans acquire a certain importance[755]. These, however, were exceptional cases. If we trace the fortunes of individual Franciscans after the Dissolution, it will be found that no generalization as to their attitude towards the Reformation can be made. A few remained loyal to the old religion[756], others embraced the new[757], and on both sides persecution was suffered for conscience’[Pg 114] sake[758]; others again contrived to reconcile themselves with both old and new according to circumstances[759].

With the Reformation as a political movement, the Franciscans had more sympathy. A large section of them had, long before this, taught the supremacy of the State over the Church in all things political[760]; they approved in principle the confiscation of Church-property for the common good[761]; and Friar Henry Standish, in defending the claim of the temporal courts to try and punish criminous clerks, together with the broad principles on which that claim rested, was only applying to present circumstances the time-honoured traditions of his Order[762]. It is true that the Friars of the Observance resisted the royal supremacy in 1534. But the supremacy claimed by Henry VIII went beyond anything asserted by his predecessors, involving, as it did in effect, the establishment of a lay jurisdiction superior to all ecclesiastical courts in spiritualibus as well as in temporalibus, constituting Henry ‘a king with a pope in his belly’[763]. The Franciscans at Oxford seem, like most of the religious, to have accepted the supremacy in this extended form and to have taken the oath without demur: at least there is no evidence to the contrary[764].

The oath administered to the monks and friars involved an acknowledgment, not only of the royal supremacy, but of the lawfulness of Henry’s divorce from Katharine and marriage with Anne Boleyn, and a promise to preach the same on every occasion[765]. The attitude of the Oxford Franciscans to the divorce, so far as it can be ascertained, may be briefly stated here.

Henry attached great importance to securing a decision in favour of his divorce from the chief universities of Europe. The divorce became the all-absorbing topic at Oxford; and individual Minorites took a prominent part in the discussions. But the convent as a whole did not present a united front. Dr. Thomas Kirkham, a Franciscan, is mentioned as one of the Doctors of Divinity who opposed the[Pg 115] divorce and were ready to write against it[766]. Dr. Kynton seems to have been on the same side at first[767]; Archbishop Warham complained of his having spread calumnious reports about himself in connexion with the ‘King’s matter,’ and demanded his punishment. But it is doubtful whether in the end Kynton had the courage of his opinions; he was one of the committee of three appointed by the theological faculty to decide the question with the assistance of thirty other members to be nominated by the smaller committee[768]. This body subsequently issued, in the name of the University, the qualified declaration in favour of the King, the tenour of which is well-known.

The most active champion of the King’s cause was also a Minorite, Dr. Nicholas de Burgo, a native of Italy, who enjoyed the patronage of Cardinal Wolsey[769]. The unpopularity of the divorce, among those who were guided by their sentiments rather than by their personal interests, is shown by the treatment he received at Oxford. He was pelted with stones in the street, and the good women of the town would have ‘foyled’ him ‘if their handys might have served their harts’[770]. In retaliation the friar caused about thirty women to be locked up in Bocardo for three days and nights[771]. As we shall see later on, his services did not go unrewarded[772]. The position of Friar Nicholas, however, was exceptional, and his action cannot be regarded as representative of the feelings of the Oxford Convent.

The causes which led to the dissolution of the monasteries do not concern us here. The friaries were not included in the Act of 1536 for the abolition of the lesser monasteries; they possessed as a rule no estates except the site on which they were built, and the gains to be derived from their disendowment were perhaps regarded as insufficient compensation for the odium which the measure would necessarily involve. The first blow had already fallen upon the Observant Friars, the fearless champions of the legality of the Queen Katharine’s marriage and of the Papal supremacy. The conventuals were left alone till Henry decided on the general suppression of the religious houses throughout England. The object of the royal party was then to obtain what was called a ‘voluntary’ surrender of their property from the members of each religious[Pg 116] community; and among those who had the courage to offer opposition were many houses of Franciscans, ‘with hom,’ writes the Bishop of Dover, ‘in every place I have moche besynes’[773]. But among these we cannot reckon the convent at Oxford.

In 1535 Cromwell sent his agent, Layton, and others, to Oxford to reform the University. After abolishing the study of the schoolmen[774], the visitors proceeded to deal with the religious students[775]. For the reform of the monasteries, they were armed with a set of eighty-six articles of inquiry and twenty-five injunctions[776], the real though not avowed object of which was to make monastic life unbearable and so to prepare the way for ‘voluntary’ surrenders[777].

It is probable, that, between this time and the summer and autumn of 1538, when the general dissolution of the friaries took place, many of the Oxford Franciscans had left their house[779]. The Friary, it will be seen, was wretchedly poor and in a ruinous condition; ‘and few do geve any almys to them’[780]. The commission to visit the Oxford[Pg 117] friaries in 1538 consisted of Dr. John London, the mayor (Mr. Banaster) and ‘master aldermen’ (apparently Mr. Pye and Mr. Fryer). On the 8th of July[781], Dr. London writes to Cromwell that he and his fellow-commissioners have been ‘at all the places of the fryers in Oxforde,’ and wishing ‘to know your lordeships pleasur’ on certain doubtful points, he proceeds to give an account of his work.

After visiting the Carmelites and Austin Friars, they came to the Grey Friars.

Before August the 14th the doctor had sent up the plate of the Oxford friaries to Cromwell’s servant in London, Mr. Thacker, and received from him ‘a bill indentyd conteynyng the parcels of the sayd plate w^t the nombre of ownces.’[785] The following is the list of

The treatment of the friars themselves was a more complicated problem. All of them seem to have been willing to become secular priests, and London urged

On the 14th of August[790] he complains that

On the 31st of August, again, he writes to Cromwell from Oxford[791]:

The list of Oxford Grey Friars who ‘wold haue ther capacytis’ which was sent to Cromwell[793], contains eighteen names, thirteen of them being priests, one subdeacon, and four not in holy orders. The[Pg 119] names are: Edward Baskerfelde, Warden, S.T.P.[794]; Friars Brian Sanden, Richard Roper, B.D., Rodulph Kyrswell, Robert Newman, William Brown, John Covire (or Conire or Comre), James Cantwell, Thomas Cappes, John Stafforde Schyer (?), William Bowghnell, James Smyzth, Thomas Wythman, priests; Friar John Olliff, subdeacon; and Friars Symon Ludforth, Thomas Barly, William Cok, and John Cok, non infra sacros.

It is not often possible to trace the subsequent career of the friars when they had been turned adrift on the world. The monks as a rule received pensions, and the entries respecting the payment of these in the Ministers’ Accounts and other records, afford some clue to their fate. The Mendicants except in a few isolated cases received no pensions. Dr. London in his letter of the 8th of July[795] asked Cromwell

but the question no doubt refers merely to the gift of a few shillings, which was usually made to each friar on his dismissal. No instance occurs in the records of a pension having been paid to any of the Grey Friars who were at Oxford at the time of the suppression[797]. It is probable that Baskerfeld, who was an important person in the University, received a benefice with license to live in Oxford. Robert Newman seems also to have been presented to a living[798]. But the career of only one of these eighteen friars can be traced with any certainty. Simon Ludford, a native of Bedford, became an apothecary in London. On November 6, 1553, he supplicated for the degree of M.B. at Oxford after six years’ study in the medical faculty. On November 27, he obtained the degree and was admitted to practise. The College of Physicians remonstrated with the University and recommended that the degree should be revoked on the ground of Ludford’s ignorance. Though the University refused to withdraw its license, the ex-friar proceeded to Cambridge, but the Physicians hastened to warn the authorities there against him. They had, they wrote to the University, already examined Ludford ‘on the 17th day before the Calends of March, 1553’ (?), and, finding him completely ignorant of medicine, philosophy, and the liberal sciences, and distinguished only by ‘blind audacity,’ unanimously voted against his admission. Ludford left Cambridge, but persevered. In May 1560,[Pg 120] he supplicated for the degree of M.D. at Oxford, stating that he had long practised in London by permission of the London College of Physicians. In July he incepted as M.D. of Oxford. In April 1563 he was made fellow of the College of Physicians, and he was censor of the same College in 1564, 1569, and 1572.[799]

We turn now to the Minorites who had studied at Oxford, but who were living in other convents at the time of the dissolution. Of these a considerable number obtained benefices[800], a few even rising to positions of some importance in the Church[801]. But what proportion these successful cases bore to the unsuccessful cannot be even approximately ascertained; it would naturally be higher among friars who had received a university education than among the common herd. Yet it is unlikely that a majority even of the former were presented to livings. The number of disbanded monks and friars seeking employment as priests must have been very large, and at the same time the demand for priests was growing less and less.[802] Some of the friars probably drifted into secular employments; others perhaps joined the ranks of the ‘sturdy beggars’ of whom so much is heard in the sixteenth century. It can hardly be doubted but that the lot of many was one of hardship and suffering.

In the eyes of Cromwell and his royal master the only question of real importance was the most advantageous disposal of the property. The buildings of the Grey Friars were of little account, and the convent was among those

The site, however, was of considerable value, Dr. London was anxious that it should be secured for the city; and his letter[804] gives a curious picture of the state of Oxford at the time of the dissolution.

The writer then urges that Mr. Banaster should have the site (‘cyte’) and profits of the White Friars, Mr. Pye those of the fair of the Austin Friars.

London goes on to plead for his ‘neybours of Oxford,’

The plan here sketched out, creditable as it is to its author, was not carried into effect. On August 10th, 1540, William Frewers and John Pye of Oxford, obtained a lease of the house and site of the Grey Friars, together with the grove containing by estimation five acres, for twenty-one years, at a rent of 20s. a year—half the amount[Pg 122] of the rent which the same persons paid for the Black Friars[805]. Much of the Grey Friars’ property was expressly excepted from this lease; namely, the close called ‘le Churcheyarde’ now held by Richard Gunter of Oxford at an annual rent of 3s. 4d., the orchard or garden called ‘Paradise,’ and the garden called ‘Boteham,’ now held by William Thomas at an annual rent of 6s. 8d. Further all large trees and shrubs were reserved to the King, together with all those buildings within the precincts of the two friaries ‘which the King had commanded to be levelled or taken away.’

In 1544 the tenants seem to have opened negotiations for the purchase of the property. In the official ‘particulars’ sent up to the royal commissioners we read:

The price which the tenants offered was probably unsatisfactory; the impecunious Pye with his wages of 4d. a day can hardly have had a chance against wealthier speculators in monastic lands. In 1544 a successful bid was made by Richard Andrewes of Hales, Esquire (Glouc.), one of the largest of these speculators[807], who as usual was acting in partnership with another, in this case John Howe. On July 14th, 1544, the King granted to these two, in consideration of £1094 3s. 2d. paid by Richard Andrewes, various monastic lands in the counties of Derby, Middlesex, Oxford, &c., including the sites of the Black and Grey Friars in Oxford[808].

All the property granted was to be held by Richard Andrewes and John Howe and the heirs and assigns of Richard Andrewes, in chief, ‘for the service of the twentieth part of one knight’s fee.’ An annual rent was to be paid to the King from each parcel of property, the rent of the site of the Friars Minors being 3s., that of the Friars Preachers 4s.

The purchase was purely a matter of speculation, and the next month (August 26th, 1544), Andrewes and Howe obtained from the King, for a fine of 9s., license to alienate the site of the Grey Friars, with the grove, churchyard, Paradise, and Boteham, and the buildings, except those already reserved for the King, to Richard Gunter, alderman of Oxford, and Joanna his wife, and the heirs and assigns of Richard Gunter, to be held by them ‘for the services due thence to us, our heirs, and successors[809].’ It does not appear whether the leases of Frewers, Pye, and Thomas, were cancelled or allowed to run their course.

The subsequent history of the property is obscure, and probably would not repay an exhaustive investigation. Wood states that the land

Part of it was ‘now inhabited by tanners[811].’ The island or grove on the south of Trill Mill stream belonged

Writing about a century later, Peshall states that the site

In a short time little was left of the buildings—so complete was the work of destruction. ‘The trees were soon cut down, all the greens trod under foot, the church thrown down, and the stones, with the images and monuments of the greatest value, scattered about[814].’ The name only survived; Agas in his map (1578) puts the Graie Friers where the house of the Black Friars stood. ‘The ruins of this college are gone to ruine,’ wrote Wood, ‘and almost lodged in obscurity[815]:’ and the ‘scanty fragments’ (rudera paucula) which were visible to Hearne and Parkinson as they walked towards the Watergate[816] have long since vanished. Even the use to which the materials were put is unknown. Some of the stones form no doubt the foundation-work of many houses in St. Ebbe’s: but while something definite is known about the materials of the Houses of the other Mendicant Orders, the records are silent respecting the greatest of the friaries[817].

[Pg 125]

PART II.

BIOGRAPHICAL AND BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES.

CHAPTER I.

CUSTODIANS AND WARDENS.

Unlike the Abbots and Priors of the religiosi possessionati, the heads of the Mendicant Houses required no royal assent to their appointment. Their names consequently do not occur in the royal records, and to this fact is due the incompleteness of the following list of the custodians and wardens of the Grey Friars at Oxford. It is a noteworthy if not surprising fact, that not a single original work by any of these men can now be found.

William of Esseby (perhaps Ashby in Norfolk)[818], the first warden, was one of the four clerks who came to England with Agnellus in 1224; he was then a young man and a novice, having recently joined the Order in France[819], and only assumed the habit of a professus when he became warden at Oxford[820]. He was among the first three Minorites authorized to preach in England[821].

When the English Province was divided into custodies (c. 1226?), he was made custodian of Oxford[822]. Afterwards he was sent to found[Pg 126] the convent at Cambridge, and Eccleston draws a strange picture of him solemnly chanting the service, with one other friar and a crippled novice, in the wooden shed which served for a chapel[823]. Later William is heard of at Northampton[824]. About 1238, he was sent by Friar Wygmund, the German visitator of England, to visit Ireland; his mission here proved as abortive as that of the German in England; on his return he went to Cologne to join Wygmund[825]. He had ceased to be warden or custodian of Oxford before 1237[826]. He was alive when William of Nottingham became Provincial Minister, and died ‘after many years’ at London[827].

Eccleston gives him a high character. He was specially distinguished for his obedience.

By his tact he did much towards winning for his Order the affection of the world, and he was instrumental in leading many fit persons of various ranks and ages ‘to the way of salvation[829].’

Eustace de Merc was a member of the Oxford convent in the lifetime of Agnellus, and had license to hear confessions; he was warden at the time of the visitatorial chapter held by Friar Wygred or Wygmund in 1237-8. On this occasion many accusations were brought against him, in consequence of which he was for a day and a half excluded from the chapter; the charges are not specified and do not seem to have been proved. After fulfilling the duties of warden[Pg 127] for a long time, he became custodian of York. The date of his death is unknown.

While he always showed to others ‘the sweetness of an angelic affection,’ he subjected himself until the end of his life to the severest discipline; even in his earlier years, his fasts and vigils and self-inflicted stripes endangered his health, and called forth the remonstrances of his superiors[830].

Peter of Tewkesbury. It is uncertain whether ‘Friar Peter, custodian of Oxford’ is to be identified with Peter of Tewkesbury; but a comparison of the dates, so far as they can be ascertained, brings out nothing inconsistent with this supposition, and we shall put the facts about both of them together. Peter of Tewkesbury was warden of London about 1234; about this time he went to Rome with Agnellus and some Friars Preachers on behalf of the English prelates[831]. Agnellus confessed to him on his death-bed and constituted him his vicar[832]. When Albert of Pisa was Provincial, Friar Peter was custodian of Oxford; he held the office for twelve years (1236-48?)[833]. During the generalship of Haymo, ‘Friar Peter, custodian of Oxford’ was one of the three friars chosen for the English province to note doubtful points in the Rule[834]. In 1245 he again appears as custodian; Adam mentions having written a detailed account to him about the proceedings at or before the Council of Lyons[835]. Peter of Tewkesbury was at the general chapter of the friars at Genoa in 1244, and remained afterwards to obtain and take back two Papal bulls about the Friars Preachers and Minors, evidently the revocation of the bull providing that no Minorite should receive the obligati of the Preachers into his Order[836]. When John of Stamford fell ill on his return from Lyons, Peter of Tewkesbury was sent to Mantes to come back with Adam Marsh, at Grostete’s request[837]. In 1250 he was minister of Cologne[838]. It was probably in the next year that he was elected fifth Provincial of England after the death of William of Nottingham[839]: he was succeeded by John of Stamford about 1256 or 1257[840]. He was[Pg 128] an intimate friend of Robert Grostete, ‘from whom he often heard many secrets of wisdom.’[841] Eccleston says of him:

He was buried at Bedford[843].

John of Stamford, custodian of Oxford[844], was a man of great importance among the friars. He was at the council of Lyons in 1245 as socius of Adam Marsh[845]. The Pope had some thoughts of sending him with others on an embassy to the Chorasmeni, Tartars, and Saracens, who had attacked the Holy Land, but the plan was not carried out[846]. On his return, he was taken ill at Beaune, and was tended by Adam Marsh[847]. John of Stamford was one of the three friars to whom the general entrusted the confirmation of the election of William of Nottingham’s successor in the office of Provincial Minister (1251)[848]. Some time after 1245 he became custodian of Oxford; he held the office in 1253 when Thomas of York incepted[849]. He joined about this time with Adam Marsh and Thomas of York in a petition to the Provincial, begging for mercy for Hugh Cote, probably a lay brother, who had stolen three horses of great value, and then repented[850]. He succeeded Peter of Tewkesbury as provincial minister about 1256[851]. His friendship with Adam Marsh lasted to the end of the latter’s life[852]: feeling that his last days were approaching, Adam begged Bonaventura, then General, to send to him John of Stamford, the English Provincial, who was at this time (1257), apparently abroad[853]. As Provincial he procured an endowment (20s. per annum) for St. Owen’s Church in London, the parish in which the Minorites then had their house[854]. He is said to have died in 1264,[Pg 129] but there is no good authority for the statement[855]. He was buried at Lynn, with which place he seems to have had some previous connexion: Brewer calls him warden of Lynn[856].

Martin is mentioned in two letters from Adam Marsh to ‘W., Minister of England’ as warden of Oxford; but the superscription is untrustworthy and the date of the letters uncertain[857]. This Martin may have been identical with the ‘Frater Martinus senex’ (mentioned by Eccleston), who established the convent at Shrewsbury, and delighted in the recollection of the hardships and poverty which he had then experienced[858]. A Martin de Barton, who was also known to Eccleston, and had often seen St. Francis, came to England in the early years of the Order, and was afterwards vicar of the English Provincial and filled many other offices[859]. When custodian of York, Martin de Barton enforced the strictest poverty, only allowing so many friars to live in any place, as could be supported by mendicancy alone without incurring debts[860].

Adam of Warminster was warden in 1269; he took part in a controversy with the Dominicans at Oxford in that year, defending his Order against the charge of being ‘receivers of money[861].’

John de Codyngton was warden in 1300, when he received license from the Bishop to hear confessions in the Archdeaconry of Oxford[862].

John de Okehampton was warden in 1340; all that is known of him will be found in the Appendix B.

Richard Clyff was custodian in 1465 and 1466. In the latter year he sued John Broghton, sheriff of Kent for a royal debt. He was sometime vice-warden of London and was buried in the church of the Minorites there[863].

[Pg 130]Richard Salford was warden in 1488 and 1489; he recovered debts from Sir John Paston, sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, and Sir Edmund Bedyngfeld, sheriff of the same counties; the records of these suits contain the only notices of him now remaining[864].

William Vavasor was studying at Oxford and transcribing philosophical treatises in 1490 and 1491[865]. He incepted as D.D. in 1500, and was warden of the convent about the same time[866]. In Thomas Cromwell’s list of learned persons not living in Oxford (A. D. 1531) is the name of ‘Dr. Vavysor, Grey Friar at...’[867]. At the dissolution he was warden of the Grey Friars at York[868], and was one of the few Mendicants who received a pension; the amount was £5 a year[869].

Robert Burton was warden on April 12, 1508, when he applied to the Chancellor’s Court to recover a debt.

As B.D. he supplicated for D.D. on March 8th, 1507/8 after studying for twenty years at Oxford and Cambridge, preaching two University sermons at Oxford, and six at Paul’s Cross, &c.; the grace was conceded on condition that he should respond once more[871]. Afterwards he became regent of the Franciscan Schools in London. The register of the Grey Friars, London, notes among those buried in the chapel of All Saints in the Franciscan church,

[Pg 131]Walter Goodfield was warden shortly before 1513; as warden he leased one of the friary gardens to Ric. Leke, brewer[873]. From the University Register[874], it appears that on Nov. 27, 1506, he supplicated to be admitted to opponency and to read the sentences, after studying twelve years in logic, philosophy, and theology; on May 10, 1507, in making the same supplication, he stated that he had studied the same subjects fourteen years. He was admitted to oppose on Dec. 10, 1507. On June 3, 1508, he supplicated as B.D. for D.D.

On March 19, 1509/10, he was allowed to count a sermon to be preached on Ash Wednesday as his examinatory sermon. On May 12, 1510, he was licensed in theology. On June 27, 1510, he was dispensed ‘pro suis lecturis minutis.’ On July 1, he was admitted D.D.; on Oct. 28, 1510, he was with three others appointed a judge to examine a sentence passed on Thomas Foster by the commissary[875]; and on Dec. 10, he was dispensed from his necessary regency, possibly owing to his duties as warden. He seems to have become warden of the London convent after this[876]. He died on the 6th of May, 1521, and was buried in the chapel of All Saints, in the Grey Friars Church, London[877].

John Harvey succeeded Goodfield as warden; he held the office in Feb. 1513/4[878], Feb. 1514/5[879], and probably for many years afterwards. He had ceased to be warden in 1529, when he was required by the vice-warden or sub-warden John Bacheler, in the name of the then warden, to answer certain charges made against him respecting his administration[880]. The following details are known about his scholastic career; he was admitted to oppose in theology Dec. 6, 1514, and admitted B.D. on Jan. 20, 1514/5; he was still B.D. in 1529; one of the same name took the degree of B. Can. L. on April 3, 1530, but he is not described as a friar[881].

[Pg 132]Edward Baskerfild was probably the immediate successor of John Harvey. In Jan. 1527/8 he held some office, being then ‘in London on the business of his house’ and likely to stay there some months[882]; he is described as warden in 1533, as custos fratrum minorum Universitatis Oxon’ in 1534[883], and he was warden at the time of the dissolution.

He supplicated for B.D. on April 12, 1526, after

was admitted to oppose on June 13, and became B.D. on Feb. 18, 1526/7[884]. He supplicated for D.D. on Dec. 9, 1531, and March 5, 1531/2, after sixteen years’ study; and became D.D. on July 8, 1532[885]. He had previously obtained a reduction of his composition on inception first to five, and then to four marks;

In Oct. 1532, he was dispensed from his necessary regency. In 1533 we find him at Exeter, trying to extract from Thomas Benet a recantation of his heresies[887].

He acted as deputy of the commisary, or vice-chancellor, in 1534, 1535, 1536, and 1537[888]. In this capacity he sometimes held his court in the Franciscan convent, as, for instance, when investigating the charges of immorality against Friar Arthur[889]. His pecuniary position seems to have improved: he kept a horse in 1534[890], and in 1537, one Robert Symon was admitted to the privileges of the University as servant of Dr. Baskerfild[891].

At the dissolution he made his peace with the visitors by causing his house to surrender at once[892]. Dr. London sent him to Thomas Cromwell (Aug. 31, 1538), to obtain the ‘capacities’ for the Oxford[Pg 133] friars, and begged Cromwell to allow him to live in Oxford ‘altho he wer benefycyd.’ As

he possessed information concerning the friars in London and elsewhere which might be useful to the King’s agents, and which he was willing to impart to them. He appears to have accompanied Dr. London on his visitation after the dissolution of the friars at Oxford, and we find him on Jan. 3, 1539, receiving in conjunction with the doctor, the surrender of the Black Friars of Derby[893]. The name is spelt in a variety of ways, e.g. Baskarwild, Bascafyld, &c.; a fifteenth century MS. in the Bodleian (Laud. Lat. 114, § 3), containing Cantica Sacra, belonged to Edward Baskervile, D.D.

Note. Wood places Herveius de Saham among the wardens of the Grey Friars (A. D. 1285). This is a mistake based on a misunderstanding of the following passage in Peckham’s Register (p. 895):

[Pg 134]

CHAPTER II.

LECTORS OR REGENT MASTERS OF THE FRANCISCANS.

The following sixty-seven names are classed together under a separate heading simply because they are found in a list in an old manuscript. The list is evidently intended to include all the Regent Masters of the Friars Minors at Oxford[894] in chronological order; it seems to break off about the year 1350. Whether it is complete up to that date may be doubted; but no contemporary, or nearly contemporary, notice has been found of any Friar Minor Regent in Theology or D.D. of Oxford before 1351, whose name does not occur in this list[895].

The list is found in two MSS:—

I. British Museum; Cotton Nero A IX, fol. 77 a-b, in Eccleston’s Chronicle. Names 1-5 are in the same hand as the rest of the MS.; 6-21 in a hand rather larger but not perceptibly later. On the reverse of the leaf, they are continued in a later fourteenth century hand which ends at the 58th name; then 59-66 have been added not much later (the ink has faded a good deal in this part); the last name is in a later hand, probably fifteenth century.

II. Phillipps, MS. 3119, fol. 76 (at Thirlestaine House). Names 1-21 are in the same hand as the MS., i.e. the text of Eccleston’s Chronicle; another scribe has added names 22-49 inclusive; then the names are continued in another hand to Laurence Briton, where the list ends. This MS. omits Henry Cruche and Walter de Chauton, so that Laurence Briton is called the 53rd master instead of the 55th.

Lectors.

1. Adam Marsh or de Marisco was born probably at the end of the 12th century in the diocese of Bath[896]. He was educated at Oxford,[Pg 135] where he studied under Robert Grostete[897], whose affectionate interest in him dated from his early years[898]. His brother Robert was made Archdeacon of Oxford by Grostete in 1248 and other members of the family were in the bishop’s service[899]. Adam’s uncle, Richard de Marisco, Bishop of Durham, from 1217 to 1226, gave him a living near Wearmouth, which he held for three years[900], and bequeathed to him his library in 1226[901]. At this time Adam was a Master, probably of Arts. Soon afterwards, at the instigation of his friend and pupil[902] Adam of Oxford, who had recently become a Minorite, he gave up ‘all worldly greatness and a large income[903]’ to enter the Franciscan Order at Worcester, ‘through zeal for greater poverty[904].’ He is said to have been appointed by the General Chapter socius of St. Anthony of Padua, the first theological student in the Order. The two then proceeded, according to the same authority, to study under the Abbat of St. Andrew’s at Vercelli, where they made such progress in five years that the Abbat confessed that his pupils had become his teachers[905]. In 1230 St. Anthony and Adam Marsh are said to have headed the opposition to the relaxations which Elias was attempting to bring into the Order[906]; but this tradition is probably unfounded; Eccleston says nothing about it[907]. After his entry into the Order, Adam probably resided for the most part at Oxford, where Grostete was then lecturing to the Franciscans. Wood asserts that the latter presided at his inception and made the customary speech in praise[Pg 136] of the inceptor at the ceremony[908]; but the statement, though probable enough in itself, lacks authority and seems to have originated from a confusion between Adam and Robert Marsh[909]: it is not unlikely that Adam received his theological degree abroad. There is no direct evidence of his having lectured on theology to the friars at Oxford before 1252[910], but there can be no doubt that he began to do so not later than 1247 (when Thomas Wallensis was elected Bishop of St. David’s), and he probably delivered lectures long before. He was certainly before this time one of the recognised leaders of the English Franciscans[911]. He was on a commission of three elected by the English province to report on the Rule when Haymo was general (1239-1244), and recommended that no change should be made in the statutes of St. Francis[912]. He wrote a solemn exhortation in the name of the English Minorites to Boniface of Savoy on his consecration to the Archbishopric of Canterbury in 1245[913]. William of Nottingham submitted to him the names of three friars from whom he was to select one to act as Vicar in the Provincial Minister’s absence (1250?)[914]. In his latter years he was one of the foremost men in the church. At the instance of the Archbishop of Canterbury and for his use, he wrote an address to the Pope on the occasion of Henry III taking the cross (1250)[915]. He addressed a long letter of advice to St. Sewalus on his appointment to the Archbishopric of York in 1255[916]. In the same year he was nominated by Alexander IV to settle a dispute between the Bishop and the Prior and Convent of Winchester[917]. He was on a Papal commission to try a cause between the King and the Bishop of St. David’s, and between the same bishop and the Abbat of Gloucester[918], and on another commission appointed to examine the claims of Richard de Wiche to canonization[919]. He[Pg 137] supported Grostete in his revolt against the scandalous nepotism of Innocent IV[920]. At Oxford his character, learning, and friendship with the great, gave him a very important position, and he acted as spokesman now of the Franciscans, now of the whole University[921]. His fame was European, and Grostete was afraid that the Parisians would secure him to supply the place of Alexander of Hales (1245)[922]. Among his correspondents and friends were many of the leading men of the age, such as Walter de Cantilupe[923], Richard de Wiche, Walter de Merton, Richard Earl of Cornwall, John of Parma, and Bonaventura. He assisted the Archbishop of Canterbury in his visitation, and accompanied Grostete to the Council of Lyons. At one time he is wanted to attend the Parliament at London[924], at another he is summoned by the Queen to Reading, to treat of ‘matters touching the King and his heirs[925].’ He incurred the royal displeasure by an outspoken sermon at Court (Oct. 1250)[926]; but his advice was asked and listened to by the King who afterwards called him his father[927].

In 1247 he was sent abroad with the Prior of the Dominicans on the King’s business, and forty marks were granted to buy horses and harness for the ambassadors[929]. In 1257 he was sent with Walter de Cantilupe, Bishop of Worcester, on a similar mission, his expenses being paid out of the treasury[930]. He was no less intimate with the Earl of Leicester than with the Bishop of Lincoln. He lectures Eleanor de Montfort on her duties as a mother and wife, and on her excess in dress[931]. He speaks equally plainly to Simon de Montfort.

The friar took a keen interest in his friend’s great deeds, recognised his noble qualities, and the value of his efforts ‘to purge, illuminate, and sanctify the church of God,’ and looked to him as the guardian[Pg 138] of the public weal[933]. He encouraged the Earl to go forward in his thankless task of saving Gascony, and tried to win the King over to his side[934].

With all his other occupations Adam Marsh did not neglect the poor and oppressed; he begs Grostete to assist two poor scholars relatives of the bishop; he writes to Thomas de Anesti on behalf of an able and honest schoolmaster who is in want of the very necessaries of life; a weeping widow brings her troubles to him, sure of sympathy and help[936]. His health gave way under the strain of his manifold duties and the severe discipline of his Order: he suffered from weakness of the eyes and other infirmities[937]. In 1253 he lost his lifelong friend Grostete, who bequeathed his library to the Oxford Franciscans out of love for Adam Marsh[938]. In 1256 the King and Archbishop of Canterbury tried to force him into the bishopric of Ely; his rival Hugh Balsham who had been elected by the chapter appealed to Rome and obtained a decision in his favour on Oct. 6, 1257. His candidature, probably none of his own seeking, seems to have laid the friar open to a charge of worldly ambition, which must have embittered his last days[939]. Feeling the end approaching, he wrote to Bonaventura to send the Provincial John of Stamford,

On Dec. 23, 1257, he was ordered abroad by the King[941]. He probably died on Nov. 18[942], 1258, and was buried next to Grostete[Pg 139] at Lincoln[943]. Besides the treatise mentioned below, none of his works remain[944] except the letters, which, stilted and obscure in style, do not justify the title of Doctor illustris, with which subsequent generations honoured him[945]. His reputation as a philosopher and theologian must rest on the evidence of his contemporaries, and on the greatness of the school which he did so much to found. Matthew Paris calls him ‘literatus[946].’ Grostete found him

His most famous pupil Roger Bacon had nothing but praise and admiration for his master, who like Grostete was ‘perfect in all wisdom[948].’

Extant works:—Epistolae.

Pastorale excerptum (perhaps merely an extract from the letters).

2. Ralph de Colebruge was the second Franciscan master who lectured at Oxford. He entered the Order while regent in theology at Paris, where he won some fame; after finishing his course of lectures, he was appointed by the General of the Order to rule in theology at Oxford, probably before 1250; he was still a novice when he entered on his duties at Oxford[949].

3. Eustace de Normaneville, probably took the Franciscan habit at Oxford about 1250 or before[950]. His conversion was of peculiar importance to the Order,

It must have been soon after his entry that the friars at Norwich asked him to become their lecturer. Adam Marsh was deputed by the Provincial to make the proposal to him. Eustace refused the honour on the plea of ill-health and ‘unprepared aptitude of mind[952].’ Eccleston mentions him as the third who lectured at the Oxford Grey Friars as a master[953]. He was afterwards sent to Cambridge and was the third regent master of the Franciscans there[954].

4. Thomas of York (1253) is first mentioned in a letter of Adam Marsh written at Lyons, 1245; the writer sends for various books, among which is

Soon afterwards we find him consulting with Adam, Grostete, and the Vicar of the Provincial Minister, about sending English friars to Denmark[956]. He wrote to Adam about the defeat of St. Louis and[Pg 141] the Crusaders in 1250, and Adam sent the letter on to Grostete[957]. About the same time Adam remonstrates with him for breaking his promises, especially for omitting to send him ‘the table of the Trinity’ (? tabula trinitatis)[958]. Another letter to him from Adam Marsh refers to the anger of the King against Simon de Montfort, whose friendship Thomas seems to have enjoyed and whose party he no doubt supported. Perhaps it was before 1250 that Adam advised the Provincial Minister to instruct Thomas,

with a view to his eventually becoming lecturer to the Grey Friars at Oxford; failing this, the writer hints that Thomas would probably be summoned abroad[959]. In the same letter he refers to his ‘youthful age.’ At the beginning of 1253[960] Thomas of York was presented to incept in theology at Oxford, objections were raised on the ground that he had not taken a degree in Arts. Eventually he was allowed to incept, but a statute was passed to regulate the conduct of the University on similar occasions in the future. The details of the controversy are given elsewhere[961]. The vesperies took place on Thursday, March 13th, and the inception on the following day, under the presidency of Friar Peter de Manners, apparently a Dominican; Adam Marsh, who as master of the inceptor would naturally have presided, left Oxford on March 12th. Thomas of York now became lecturer to the Oxford Franciscans[962]. He was afterwards sent to Cambridge and occurs as the sixth in the list of ‘Masters of the Friars Minors’ there[963]. Adam Marsh writes to him in the most affectionate terms and speaks highly of his learning, and the brightness of his intellect[964]; he describes him to Grostete as an earnest, discreet, and benevolent man, filled with a heavenly zeal for the salvation of souls[965]. According to the Catalogus illustrium Franciscanorum he wrote a commentary on Ecclesiastes[966].

[Pg 142]Frater Thomas de Eboraco super Metaphysicam Aristotelis.

5. Richard Rufus of Cornwall[967] was a Master, probably of Arts, when he became a Minorite at Paris

He came to England (where he made his profession) while the trial of the Minister-General was yet pending in the Roman Court[968]. He is mentioned as speaking at a chapter at Oxford soon after coming to England—probably either the visitatorial chapter or the chapter held to protest against the visitor’s conduct in 1238[969]. Soon after 1250 he received a command from the General to go to Paris as lecturer, but he seems to have obtained leave to continue his studies at Oxford owing to his weak health[970]. He probably lectured on the sentences as B.D. about this time. But soon afterwards, ‘ob vehementiores perturbationum occasiones[971],’ in Adam Marsh’s words, he formed the ‘inexorable resolution’ of going to France in accordance with the General’s permission: and Adam in the name of the other friars, requested the Provincial to facilitate his departure by providing him with suitable companions and the necessary manuscripts[972]. Early in 1253 again, Adam writes to the Provincial:

[Pg 143]It may then be inferred that he went to Paris in 1253, where, according to Eccleston,

After lecturing in Paris, he returned to Oxford, it appears, and became regent-master of the friars (c. 1255?)[975]. It was here that he developed the ‘errors,’ the verbal subtleties, which Roger Bacon so unsparingly denounced. Writing in 1292, Bacon says[976]:

Adam Marsh, though in somewhat general terms, gives a far more flattering account of Richard[981].

Martin de Sancta Cruce, Master of the Hospital of Sherbourne, bequeathed to him in his will dated November, 1259, unum habitum integrum, and a copy of the Canonical Epistles[982].

Assisi MS. 176 contains a compilation ascribed by a note in a late hand to ‘Master Richard Rufus of England;’ the volume was in the possession of the friars at Assisi in 1373, consists of 226 leaves, and seems to contain more than one treatise: it is not rubricated.

Inc. ‘Deus autem qui dives est in misericordia propter nimiam caritatem suam.’

6. John Wallensis was B.D. of Oxford before he entered the Order[983]. He must have become D.D. and regent master of the Franciscan schools at Oxford before 1260[984]. It was probably after this that he went as lecturer to Paris, where he was honoured with the title of[Pg 144] Arbor Vitae[985], and where he was buried[986]. But before his death he was again in England. In October, 1282, ‘Friar John Wallensis, S.T.D.,’ was sent by Archbishop Peckham as ambassador to the insurgent Welsh[987]. In 1283 he was one of the five doctors at Paris who were deputed to examine the doctrines of Peter John Olivi[988]. He enjoyed a great reputation as a theologian, and the widespread and lasting popularity of his works is shown by the large number of MSS. and printed editions which have come down to us. His writings are specially illustrative of the practical side of the Franciscan teaching.

Summa de Penitentia. Inc. ‘Quoniam provida solertia est.’

Breviloquium de quatuor virtutibus cardinalibus, or, de virtutibus antiquorum principum et philosophorum: four or five parts:

i. De justitia; ii. De prudentia; iii. De temperantia; iv. De fortitudine; v. De ordinatione virtutum (this is sometimes included in part iv). Inc. prol. ‘Quoniam misericordia et veritas.’

Ordinarium[993], or, Alphabetum vitae religiosae: 3 parts:

[Pg 145]i. Diaetarium; ii. Locarium; iii. Itinerarium. Inc. prol. ‘Nunquid nosti ordinem coeli.’ Inc. pars i. ‘Quoniam omni negotio.’

Summa collectionum (or, collationum), or, Communiloquium, Summa collationum ad omne genus hominum, or, De vitae regimine, or, Margarita Doctorum, or, Communes loci ad omnium generum argumenta. A compendium for the use of young preachers, consisting of 7 parts:

i. De constitutione reipublice; ii. De colligatione membrorum reipublice; iii. De informacione hominum; iv. De republica ecclesiastica; v. De instructione scolasticorum; vi. De instructione religiosorum; vii. De informacione hominum ut sint parati ad mortem. Inc. prol. ‘Cum doctor sive predicator evangelicus.’ Inc. pars i. ‘Quoniam respublica, ut dictum est, est universale quoddam corpus.’ Inc. cap. i. ‘Sed primo notandum est quod respublica est res populi.’

Floriloquium philosophorum, or, Floriloquium sive compendiloquium de vita et dictis illustrium philosophorum, or, de philosophorum dictis exemplis et vitis. 10 parts:

i. On philosophy in general; ii. On the name and profession of philosophers; iii. On the succession of illustrious philosophers and[Pg 146] their life; iv. On the life and maxims of some less famous philosophers; v. Of divers philosophic perfections; vi. On the four principal sects of philosophers—peripatetics, stoics, academicians, and epicureans; vii. On the seven liberal arts; viii. Poets and authors of apologues; ix. On the abuses of philosophy; x. On the places where philosophic studies have been most honoured (e.g. Paris and Oxford mentioned). Inc. prol. i. ‘Cum enim debeamus apes imitari.’ Inc. prol. operis. ‘Cum ex vita gentilium.’ Inc. opus. ‘Circa primum notandum quod diversimode describitur philosophia.’

Breviloquium de sapientia sanctorum. 8 chapters:

Inc. prol. ‘Cum varii sint homines omnes.... Licet in priori tractatulo[994].’ Inc. cap. i. ‘Sapientia enim dicitur ab eo quod est sapere.’

Summa justitiae, or, Tractatus de septem vitiis ex [Gul. Alverno] Parisiensi. 10 parts.

i. De peccato in generali; ii. De superbia; iii. De invidia; iv. De ira; v. De avaricia; vi. De accidia; vii. De gula; viii. De luxuria; ix. De quinque sensibus corporis; x. De quibusdam peccatis, &c. Inc. prol. ‘Summa justicie Christi fidelium est declinare a malo et facere bonum.’ Inc. opus. ‘Justicia que est via ad regnum ut supradictum est in duobus consistit.’

[Pg 147]Tractatus de vitiis et remediis eorum (doubtful).

Inc. ‘Dicendum est de vitiis seu peccatis primo in generali.’

Moniloquium vel collectiloquium. A work in 4 parts for the use of young preachers:

i. De viciis; ii. De virtutibus oppositis dictis viciis; iii. De penis; iv. De gloria beatorum.

The object is thus set forth in the prologue:

Inc. prol. ‘Cum almus,’ &c. Inc. opus. ‘Cum autem nostra sit intencio ut dictum est aliqua auctentica in generali colligere.’ Inc. pars i., dist. i., cap. i. ‘De primo notandum quod describitur vicium sub nomine mali.’

Legiloquium sive liber de decem preceptis, or, De decem mandatis divinis, or, Summa de preceptis.

Inc. ‘Scribam eis multiplices leges.... Omnipotens creator omnium.’

Manipulus Florum, begun by John Wallensis, finished by Thomas Hibernicus, to whom it is usually ascribed; excerpts from the fathers, in alphabetical order.

Inc. prol. ‘Abite in agro, &c. Paupercula non habet messem.’ Inc. opus. ‘Abstinentia. Bonum est in cibo.’

De origine progressu et fine Mahumeti et quadruplici reprobatione prophetiae ejus, cap. xv.

Sermones de tempore et de sanctis.

Postilla super Johannem.

Collationes in Johannem. Ascribed also to Bonaventura, and printed among his works (edit. 1589, tom. ii): probably by the same author as the preceding Postilla.

Commentaries on Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Isaiah.

The following works are sometimes assigned to John Wallensis:—

Expositio super Pater Noster.

In fabulas Ovidii, or, Expositiones seu moralitates in lib. i. (?) Metamorphoseon sive fabularum (Leland and Tanner). This appears to be the work generally ascribed to Thomas Walleys, and, by M. Hauréau, to Peter Bercherius[996]. There is no real ground for assigning it, as Leland does, to John Wallensis.

In mythologicon Fulgentii.

Comment. in Valerium de non ducenda uxore.

As to other works attributed to him with some show of reason by the older bibliographers:

7. Thomas Docking, also called Thomas Good[999], was a native of Norfolk and probably entered the Order at Norwich. In a letter written A. D. 1252-3[1000], Adam Marsh asks the Provincial Minister to assign the bible of the late P. of Worcester to ‘friar Thomas de Dokkyng,’ who was distinguished by good morals and pleasant manners, a clear head, great learning and ready eloquence; his friends were ready to pay handsomely for the book. He was evidently a student at this time. He became D.D. and reader to the Franciscans at Oxford about 1260[1001]. In 1269, when he took an active part in the controversy with the Oxford Dominicans, he is described as ‘sometime reader at Oxford[1002].’ According to Blomefield, he was warden of Norwich and died about 1270[1003]. His theological works, chiefly biblical commentaries, were long held in high repute[1004]; some are still preserved.

Expositio super librum Deuteronomii.

[Pg 152]

Comment. on Isaiah.

Expositio super Epistolas S. Pauli.

Lectura super Apocalypsin, doubtfully ascribed to him.

Expositio Decalogi. Inc. ‘Non habebis deos alienos in conspectu meo. Hoc est in corde.’

Questions on St. Luke.

Questio utrum Job in prosperis fuerit altior coram Deo quam in adversis.

Comment. super Sententias, mentioned in the Catalogue of Illustrious Franciscans (Leland)[1007].

8. H. de Brisingham[1008] is probably the same as

who composed a Summa de Sacramentis in 1261[1009]. He afterwards became thirteenth master of the Friars Minors at Cambridge[1010]. Blomefield claims him as a Norfolk man, and says that he died about 1280[1011]. He is perhaps to be identified with ‘Henricus de Oxonio[Pg 153] Chordigerae sectae’, whose sermons were seen by Bale in the Franciscan Library at Reading[1012].

The De Sacramentis Summa is his only extant work.

9. William of Heddele (Durham or Northumberland?) is mentioned by Adam Marsh in a letter to the Provincial, c. 1253, as ‘your desirable son Friar William de Hedele[1013].’ We know from another source that Heddele was reader at Oxford in 1269, when he took part in the controversy with the Friars Preachers[1014]. When Prince Edward went to the Holy Land,

The chronicler puts these events in the year 1266. Edward took the cross in 1268 and sailed in 1270. Friar William died on the outward voyage in the sea of Greece:

10. Thomas de Bungay (Suffolk) has been traditionally associated with Roger Bacon and regarded as a wizard by later generations. Very little is known of him. He perhaps entered the Order at Norwich. He lectured as D.D. in the Franciscan convent at Oxford about 1270; he seems like Roger to have attached a great importance to mathematics and may have held his views on the value of natural science and of induction. He lectured afterwards at Cambridge, being the fifteenth in the list of Franciscan masters there. He was the eighth English Provincial Minister, and was succeeded by Peckham, probably in 1275. He was buried at Northampton[1016].

According to the Catalogue of Illustrious Franciscans he wrote a Commentary on the Sentences[1017]. None of his works are printed; only one seems to be extant in MS.

De celo et mundo: 3 books. Inc. ‘Summa cognicionis, &c. Aristoteles probat his tres questiones in primo capitulo. Prima est quod omne corpus est completum quo ad divisiones.’ Expl. ‘Hic terminantur questiones super 3 c. et m. a Magistro T. de bungeya.’

[Pg 154]

11. John Peckham was born in Sussex and received his earliest education in the Priory of Lewes[1018]. He took the Franciscan vows about 1250[1019]; he was then tutor to the nephew of Master H. of Anjou, perhaps in the University of Paris, but was probably for the time being residing at Oxford[1020]. On entering the Order he resigned the tutorship. Adam Marsh calls him ‘Dominus Johannes de Pescham Scholaris;’ he may therefore either have had no degree at this time, or that of bachelor. He appears to have spent some time at Oxford, as in later years he expresses his gratitude for the training he received in the Franciscan convent of that University[1021]. He then returned to France, studied under Bonaventura, and took the Doctor’s degree at Paris, where he ruled in theology[1022]. Among his pupils was St. Thomas of Cantilupe, Bishop of Hereford[1023]. At Paris too he came in contact with Thomas Aquinas and probably attended his lectures. He was present when the latter submitted his doctrine about the ‘Unity of form’ to the judgment of the masters in theology;

He was at Paris during the troublous times which followed William of St. Amour’s attack on the Mendicants, and wrote a defence of the latter[1025]. He returned to England probably about 1270 or soon after, and was admitted at Oxford to the same degree as he held at Paris[1026]. He now became lecturer to the Franciscans. On May 2, 1275, he[Pg 155] was with Friar Oliver de Encourt Prior of the Dominicans, appointed, by the King’s writ, to decide a suit in the University which had long been under consideration in the Chancellor’s court[1027]. It was probably soon after this that he was elected ninth Provincial Minister and confirmed by Bonaventura[1028]. He did not hold this office long, being in 1277, summoned by the Pope (Nicholas III?) to lecture on theology in the schools of the Papal Court at Rome[1029]. After lecturing here for something less than two years, he was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury by Papal bull in January 1279, and consecrated by the Pope in the following March[1030]. His official connexion with the Order did not cease; he was deputed by the Pope

and frequently used his powers for the benefit of the Franciscans[1031]. His relations to the Oxford Franciscans, as well as his condemnation of erroneous doctrines at the University, have already been noticed. While enforcing to the uttermost his legal rights, the Archbishop evinced a special solicitude for the poor, feeding them in time of famine, remonstrating with covetous abbats and careless landlords[1032]. He himself is said to have travelled on foot, to have surpassed all in watchings and fastings and prayer, to have used none but vile garments and bedding—in fine to have lived as became one who held perfection to consist in the contempt of riches and the search for truth[1033]. He died on December 8, 1292, and was buried ‘among the monks’ of Canterbury near Becket’s tomb[1034]. His heart was buried in the choir behind the High Altar at the Grey Friars of London[1035]. He named as his executors the Friars Minors of Paris[1036]. The Dominican Nicholas Trivet sums up his character in these words[1037]:

A careful and valuable account of his works will be found in Mr. Trice Martin’s preface to Peckham’s Register, Vol. III[1038].

A few additions may be made to Mr. Martin’s list of his extant writings.

Constitutiones Ottoboni cum expositione Peccham.

Quaestiones ordinariae. Inc. ‘Utrum theologia ex duobus.’

Tractatus Fratris Joannis Pecham Ord. Min. contra Fratrem Rogerium (Ord. Praed.) obloquentem contra suum Ordinem (called by Tanner, Contra Priorem Cisterciensium). Inc. ‘Super tribus et super quatuor sceleribus.’

Formula confessionum. Inc. ‘Sicut dicit b. Joannes.’

Scriptum super Ethicam.

12. Henry de Apeltre was the twelfth reader at Oxford, and seventeenth master of the Friars Minors at Cambridge. Nothing more is known about him[1039].

13. Robert Cross or Crouche[1040] (de Cruce) must have lectured at Oxford about 1280. In April of that year Peckham forbade an Oxford Dominican to visit a certain ‘college of women’ on account[Pg 157] of grave suspicion, on the accusation of Friar Robert de Cruce[1041]. Leland states that he was immersed in philosophical studies to an advanced age, and when at last he betook himself to theology he showed greater skill in investigating speculative subtleties than in exploring the literal sense; the statement might be made with equal truth of most of the scholastics. He became Provincial Minister soon after 1280. The successor of John Peckham, Hugh of Bath, died within a short time of his appointment, and was succeeded by Robert Cross as eleventh minister[1042]. He held the office in June 1284, when he obtained for the English Minorites exemption from the payment of a custom due to the King from all who passed to or from the Continent by the port of Dover[1043]. In Sept. of the same year he held a chapter of the English Franciscans[1044]; and in March 1285, he represented the English Province at the General Chapter of Milan[1045]. He may have resigned the dignity at this Chapter; on Oct. 31, 1285, Peckham addresses a letter to ‘W., Provincial Minister of the Friars Minors’; this must be William of Gainsborough[1046]. Robert Cross was buried at Bridgwater[1047]. None of his works remain. Leland mentions his commentaries on the Physics and the Sentences, on the authority of the Catalogue of Illustrious Franciscans.

14. R. de Toftis, called by Wood, Radulphus de Toftis.

15. Alanus de Rodano.

16. Roger de Marston or Merscheton[1048] was D.D. of Oxford and lecturer to the Franciscans before 1290. Some questions on which he disputed, perhaps before he became doctor, are preserved in a MS. at Assisi[1049]. He subsequently lectured at Cambridge as twelfth master of the friars[1050]. According to Ehrle, Marston’s theological and philosophical teaching bears strong resemblance in some respects to that of Peter John Olivi[1051]. He became thirteenth Provincial Minister perhaps at the great Chapter of Paris in 1292,[Pg 158] certainly between 1285 (when W. of Gainsborough was appointed) and 1299 (when Hugh of Hertepol was Provincial). He is said to have been warden of Norwich and to have died in 1303[1052]. He was buried at Norwich[1053].

17. Alan de Wakerfeld[1054] was at Oxford in 1269, when he represented his convent on several occasions in the controversy with the Friars Preachers[1055]. He was not yet lector.

18. Nicholas de Ocham occurs in the Assisi MS. as Hotham, Master Nicolaus de Hotham, and Frater N. de Ocham minor[1056]. He lectured at Oxford towards the end of the thirteenth century. Except the quaestiones disputatae at Assisi, it is doubtful whether any of his works are extant[1057]. Leland says:

19. Walter de Knolle was afterwards twenty-third master at Cambridge[1060].

20. Hugh de Hertepol or Hartlepool was a friar and a man of importance in Oxford in 1282, when Devorguila appointed him to be one of the two proctors to whom the government of the new college of Balliol was entrusted; the statutes of 1282 are addressed to ‘Friar Hugh de Hertilpoll and Master William de Menyl[1061].’ It was probably[Pg 159] some years later that Hugh became S.T.P. and lecturer to the Franciscan convent. His disputations seem to have been considered valuable and several of them are preserved[1062]. He disputed

He became fourteenth Provincial Minister, in succession to Roger Marston. The date of his appointment or election is uncertain. In April 1299[1064], we hear of him going as Provincial, with Friar W. of Gainsborough as his socius, to the General Chapter at Lyons; on this occasion the King gave to the two friars 10 marks. In 1300 (Aug. 7) at Dorchester (Oxon), he chose twenty-two friars of the Oxford convent and presented them to Dalderby, Bishop of Lincoln[1065], with the request that he would license them to hear confessions. The bishop asked ‘whether he was presenting them for all the convents in the diocese of Lincoln,’ and, finding that it was only for the Oxford convent, refused to license more than four. At length a compromise was effected, and eight of the friars were licensed to hear confessions in the archdeaconry of Oxford. In 1301[1066], Hugh was again abroad, probably at the General Chapter at Genoa. In Sept. 1302, he was, with W. of Gainsborough and others, sent as ambassador to the Court of Rome to negotiate for peace with the King of France[1067]. While in Italy on this mission, he attended the General Chapter at Assisi[1068]; he probably did not return to England, as we are told that he was ‘buried among the friars at Assisi[1069].’

21. John de Persora or Pershore (c. 1390) called in the Assisi MS. John de Persole (see above, under Hertepol).

22. John of Berwick lectured at Oxford before the end of the thirteenth century. He was buried at Stamford. Bale identifies him with a Brenlanlius who is referred to by John Pico de Mirandola in his treatise contra Astrologos.

[Pg 160]

Joannis Anglici Ordinis Minorum Summa Astrologiae Judicialis, quae anglicana vulgo nuncupatur (doubtful).

Questiones Joannis de Beroyko de Ordine Fratrum Minorum de Formis.

Leland adds: ‘Collaudat eruditorum Index Franciscanorum ejus In longobardum elucubrationes[1070].’

23. Thomas of Barneby, wrongly called by Brewer ‘Johannes de Barneby,’ is identified by Wood, without much probability, with the first Senior Dean of Merton College, who was appointed by Kilwardby in 1276[1071]. He is mentioned in a record dated March 20, 1326, as ‘master of the Friars Minors[1072].’

24. Adam of Lincoln, D.D. and regent master of the Franciscans at Oxford, succeeded Hugh of Hertepol as fifteenth Provincial Minister, probably in 1304[1073]; he had ceased to hold the office in 1310[1074]. He was one of the doctors of theology appointed in the Provincial Council of York in July 1311, to examine the charges of heresy against the Knights Templars[1075]. He was buried at Lincoln. The Register of the Friars Minors of London adds: qui fecit mirabilia; probably some word like opera is to be supplied[1076].

25. William of Gainsborough[1077] must have been Provincial Minister before he lectured at Oxford[1078]. He was Provincial in Oct. 1285, being the twelfth in order[1079]. He was doctor of theology in[Pg 161] 1294, when he was sent with Friar Hugh of Manchester, a Dominican, to the King of France, to protest against the latter’s seizure of Gascony and to renounce homage in the name of the English King[1080]. In 1299 he accompanied the Provincial, Hugh of Hertepol, to the General Chapter at Lyons[1081]. Early in 1300 he was called by Boniface VIII to lecture on theology in the Roman Curia[1082]; the King paid his expenses.

During the two years that he remained at Rome[1084], his energies were not entirely confined to his work as lecturer. Boniface was at this time endeavouring to bring the war between France and England to a close by arbitration. In Sept. 1300, Friar William of Gainsborough was appointed by Edward I to act as one of his ‘proctors and special messengers’ at Rome in this matter[1085]; and in Sept. 1302, he was employed with Hugh of Hertepol and others in the same capacity[1086]. On Oct. 24, 1302, the Pope, passing over the candidate of the Chapter, nominated William, Bishop of Worcester; the consecration took place on Nov. 25, the enthronement on June 9, 1303[1087]. As a protest against the Papal interference, the King imposed a fine of 1000 marks on the new bishop[1088], but granted him £100 for the expenses for his inthronization in consideration of his great need[1089].[Pg 162] William still continued to be employed in affairs of state[1090]. In March 1307, at Carlisle, he demanded and obtained from the Papal nuncio the excommunication of the murderers of John Comyn[1091]. On March 22, he was appointed to accompany Prince Edward on his journey to France to claim the hand of Isabella[1092]. Later in the same year he was sent on an embassy to Rome in connexion with the same affair[1093]. On his return journey[1094] he died at Beauvais (Sept. 17); as nearly all his attendants died at the same time, it was believed that the calamity was due to poison[1095]. The bishop was buried among the Friars Minors at Beauvais[1096].

26. John Basset.

One of this name is said to have written Chronica in English; he was probably much later than this friar. Tanner, Bibl. 79.

27. Thomas Rondel or Rundel[1097] was lecturer at Oxford in the last years of the thirteenth century, having previously read the sentences at Paris[1098]. In 1309 he was one of the commissioners or inquisitors appointed to hear the accusations against the Knights Templars; he is then described as master of theology, and probably resided in the convent at London[1099], where he was buried[1100].

28. Adam of Howden or Hoveden or Houdene[1101] was D.D. and probably regent master of the Franciscans at Oxford in 1300. He was one of the twenty-two friars presented by Hugh of Hertepol on July 26 of this year, to receive the bishop’s license to hear confessions at Oxford, and was one of the eight actually licensed[1102]. He afterwards read at Cambridge as the twenty-ninth master of the Friars Minors[1103]. An ‘Adam de Houdene’ was chamberlain to W. of Gainsborough, Bishop of Worcester (1302-7), but he was not a friar.[1104]

[Pg 163]29. Philip of Briddilton or Bridlington was contemporary with Adam of Hoveden, and like him was licensed as D.D. by the Bishop of Lincoln to hear confessions in 1300[1106]. He responded in the schools to Master Richard de Heddrington or Herington on the question ‘an omnes beati equaliter participant beatitudine[1107],’ a problem which agitated western Christendom in the early fourteenth century.

30. Peter de Baldeswell[1108] was at Oxford in 1300, when he was presented by the Provincial to the Bishop of Lincoln, but not licensed to hear confessions[1109]. He was not then D.D.

31. John de Horley, co. Oxon or Surrey (the same applies to him as to P. of Baldeswell).

32. Martin of Alnwick was a member of the Oxford convent in 1300; he was among the twenty-two friars for whom Hugh of Hertepol sought to obtain license to hear confessions, and was one of those rejected. He was not a D.D. at this time[1110]. He took his degree and lectured at Oxford between 1300 and 1311. In the latter year he was summoned to Avignon to take part in the controversy between the Conventual and Spiritual Franciscans, as one of the four advisers of the General Minister. The matter was tried by a commission of cardinals and theologians; Martin and his fellows pleaded the cause of the Conventuals, or Community of the Order. The case was adjourned to the Council of Vienne and decided by the bull Exivi de Paradiso (which was published in the last session of the Council, May 6, 1313) in favour of the better section of the Conventuals[1111]. Martin of Alnwick was evidently one of the leading Franciscans of the time. According to Bale he died 1336 and was buried at Newcastle[1112].

33. Robert of Beverley.

34. Richard de Coniton or Conyngton (co. Cambridge or Huntingdon) was at Oxford in 1300 and was one of the friars to whom the Bishop of Lincoln refused the right to hear confessions[1113]. He became D.D. and lecturer to the Franciscans between 1300 and 1310. He was afterwards thirty-first master of the Minorites at Cambridge[1114]. He was sixteenth Provincial of England, and held the office in 1310[1115]. About this time the Order was disturbed by the violent antagonism of the two parties within it—the ‘Community,’ the lax or moderate party which comprised the majority and included the official heads of the Order, and the strict or ‘Spiritual’ party. A papal investigation into the causes of dispute and into the observance of Rule by the Order was instituted, and the leaders of each party summoned to the Curia. Richard Conyngton as Provincial was the official representative of the English Franciscans at Avignon and Vienne (1301-1313)[1116]. He was buried at Cambridge[1117].

He is said by Leland and Bale to have written a treatise De Christi Dominio against Ockham in defence of the papal authority[1118].

Wadding states that he had seen Richard’s Commentary on the Sentences in the Vatican[1119]. Bale mentions his exposition on the seven penitential psalms, ex monasterio Nordovicensi[1120].

Tractatus Magistri Richardi Conygton Ministri Angliae de paupertate contra opiniones Fratris Petri Joannis (Olivi). Inc. ‘Beatus qui intelligit super egenum et pauperem. Ps. Praecedit actus meritorius.’

35. Thomas of Pontefract was at Oxford in 1300; when the bishop of Lincoln refused to grant him license to hear confessions.[Pg 165] He became D.D. and lecturer in theology some years after this. In July 1311 he was one of the inquisitors appointed to extort confession of heresy from twenty-four Templars in the Province of York[1121].

36. Peter de Sutton; ‘jacet Stanfordiae,’ i.e. Stamford, co. Lincoln[1122].

37. Ralph of Lockysley[1123] or Lockeleye[1124] was regent master at Oxford about 1310. He was buried at Worcester[1125]. According to Bale (I, 366) he wrote De paupertate evangelica, &c.

38. William of Schyrbourne (1312) was at Oxford in 1300; he was one of the friars presented by the Provincial for license to hear confessions, and rejected by the bishop of Lincoln[1126]. He was master of the Friars Minors in 1312, and in this capacity gave some support to the Dominicans in their controversy with the University[1127].

Leland says: ‘Ejus extant Quodlibeta Theologica, lib. i.’ (?)[1128].

39. William of Nottingham is confounded with the fourth Provincial Minister by Wadding, Bale, Pits, and the Register of Friars Minors of London[1129]. In a work attributed to him, but really composed by his namesake, occurs the following note, in a hand of the fifteenth century[1130]—

In the absence of any confirmatory evidence, no weight can be attached to this statement. No William of Nottingham occurs in Le Neve’s Fasti. At the beginning of the fifteenth century a John of Nottingham held two prebends and was treasurer of York: and he may be the person referred to in the first part of the note; it is worthy of remark[Pg 166] that the MS. originally came from York. William of Nottingham must have been reader to the Franciscans soon after 1312. While regent in theology at Oxford he was largely occupied in transcribing MSS., especially the works of Nicholas de Gorham, the expenses being defrayed by his brother Dominus Hugh of Nottingham[1131]. He succeeded Richard Conyngton as seventeenth Provincial Minister[1132]. In 1322 he was at the General Chapter of Perugia, and, with the other ministers, signed the famous letter in which the Franciscans declared that the doctrine De paupertate Christi was not heretical but sane and catholic; this was the beginning of the revolt of the whole Order (as distinguished from the Spirituals) against John XXII[1133]. According to Bale he died Oct. 5, 1336[1134]. He was buried at Leicester[1135].

40. John de Wylton lectured at Oxford in 1314: in February of that year he appears, as representative of the Minorites, in a list of twelve regent masters in theology (i.e. the theological faculty for the time being), who condemned as heretical eight articles, chiefly concerning the nature of the Trinity, in the convent of the Austin Friars[1136]. Wood[1137], Bale[1138], and Tanner[1139], call him an Austin Friar. Bale states that he studied and lectured as master at Paris, and says that John Baconthorpe, in his commentaries on Books I and II of the Sentences, speaks of him with high praise[1140]. His works seem to have perished[1141].

41. John de Crombe (Cott. MS.) or Crombre (Phil. MS.) was perhaps a native of Combs in Suffolk: he was buried at Oxford[1142].

Compendium theologicae veritatis per fratrem Johannem de Combis, lib. vii. Inc. ‘Veritatis theologie cum superni.’

42. William of Alnwick is possibly identical with the friar called Roger of Alnwick in the list of Oxford Franciscans presented to the bishop of Lincoln in 1300[1143]. After lecturing at Oxford (c. 1315-1320?), he was sent to the University of Naples, as Doctor of Theology[1144]. He was present at the General Chapter of Perugia in 1322, and joined with the other leading men in the Order in declaring that the doctrine of Evangelical Poverty was not heretical[1145]. In 1330 he was made bishop of Giuvenazzo near Bari[1146]. He is said to have died at Avignon in 1332[1147]. Bartholomew of Pisa mentions him among the famous Franciscan theologians of the English nation[1148]; William Woodford places him among

Questiones Almoich super primum Sententiarum.

Questiones Almoich in 1 et 2 Sententiarum[1150].

43. William Herberd or Herbert, if we may credit the Lanercost Chronicle, which is usually trustworthy at this period, was at Paris in 1290[1151]. From his place in the list of masters, it might be inferred that he lectured at Oxford about 1315-1320. But if the following works ascribed to him are genuine, he must have flourished not much later than 1250-60. They are preserved in a fourteenth-century MS. formerly in the library of Henry Farmer of Tusmor, Oxon, now in the Phillipps Library at Thirlestaine House[1152].

William Herbert was buried at Hereford, which was probably his native convent[1155].

44. Thomas of St. Dunstan (Kent?).

45. John of Reading (de Radingia) was buried at Avignon. He had probably gone to the papal curia in connexion with the revolt of Michael de Cesena and William of Ockham[1156].

46. John of Thornton; the name is uncertain; it may be Jornton; the Phillipps MS. reads Zortone.

47. Richard of Drayton, was buried at Shrewsbury[1157].

48. Robert of Leicester seems to have been a protégé of Richard Swinfeld, bishop of Hereford, to whom he dedicated his first extant work in 1294[1158]. He was S.T.P. and in residence at Oxford in 1325, and probably lecturer to the friars about the same time. In this year he was associated with Nicholas de Tyngewick, M.D. and S.T.B. as ‘Magister Extraneus’ of Balliol College[1159]. The two were called upon to decide whether the statutes of the College allowed the members to attend lectures in any faculty except that of Arts, and ordained ‘in the presence of the whole community’ that this was not permissible.[Pg 169] Among those present in the Hall of Balliol when the decision was proclaimed was Richard Fitzralph, afterwards Archbishop of Armagh, the great opponent of the Mendicant Orders[1160]. Bale and Pits say that Robert died at Lichfield in 1348; ‘but,’ adds Wood, ‘I suppose ’twas sooner.’

De compoto Hebreorum aptato ad Kalendarium, four parts with prologue; composed A. D. 1294. Inc. prol. ‘Operis injuncti novitatem, pater meritis insignissime, magister et domine R. Dei gratia Herfordensis antistes ecclesie.’

Compotus Hebreorum purus. Inc. ‘Prima earum est a creacione mundi.’

Commentariolus supra tabulas in tractatu primo supra recensito descriptas (or, De ratione temporum), written in 1295. Inc. ‘Ad planiorem et pleniorem prescripti tractatus intelligenciam.’

These three works are contained in MS. Bodl. Digby 212 (sec. xiv).

Distinctiones.

De paupertate Christi.

49. Walter de Foxisley, or Ffoxle in Phillipps MS. (Norfolk or Wilts?).

50. Henry Cruche. A sermon by ‘H. de Cruce, Minor,’ is in Merton Coll. MS. No. 248, f. 170. This name is omitted in the list given in the Phillipps MS.

51. John de Ratforde (cf. 63rd master).

52. John de Preston[1162].

[Pg 170]53. Walter de Chauton[1163] is no doubt identical with Walter de Chatton, who with the warden was summoned to appear in the Mayor’s Court, to answer a charge, brought against the convent, of wrongfully keeping two books, in 1330[1164]; he evidently held some official position at this time, presumably that of regent master. He is said to have been warden of Norwich, probably his native convent, and to have taught theology there[1165]. He was one of the D.D.’s whom Benedict XII consulted in drawing up his Statutes for the Franciscan Order in 1336[1166]. This fact lends some support to Bale’s statement that he became papal penitentiary and died at Avignon in 1343[1167]. Bartholomew of Pisa mentions him among the famous writers of the Order; William of Woodford among those who entered the Order in their youth, and ‘wrote many works of great wisdom[1168].’

Cathon sur les Sentences [W. Chatton[1169] or R. Cowton?].

Questio fratris Galtheri magistri ... de schaton, que est secunda in ordine primi sui in prologo. Inc. ‘Utrum Deus possit creare.’ Expl. ‘Et ideo non est simile.’

54. John de Ridevaus, Rideval, or Redovallensis, sometimes called John de Musca, according to Bale[1170], flourished about 1330. Of the works attributed to him, the Commentary on Fulgentius seems to be the same as that attributed to John Wallensis; similarly perhaps with the commentary on the letter of Valerius to Rufinus; the moral exposition of the Metamorphoses seems to differ from that ascribed to Thomas Walleys and Peter Bercherius.

[Pg 171]Lectura super Apocalypsi.

‘Commentarius super Fulgencium continens picturas virtutum et viciorum sub ymaginibus deorum et dearum quos colebat vana superstitio paganorum editus a fratre J. de Ridevall de ordine fratrum minorum.’ Inc. ‘Intencio venerabilis viri Fulgencii.’

‘Ovidii Metamorphoseos fabule ccxviii moraliter exposite.’ Inc. ‘In hujus expositionis initio.’

In Valerium ad Rufinum de uxore non ducenda. Inc. ‘Loqui perhibeor.’

Commentaries on St. Augustine’s De Civitate Dei. Inc. ‘Magnus dominus et laudabilis nimis in civitate Dei.’

55. Lawrence Briton is perhaps the same as Laurentius Wallensis mentioned by Tanner, who wrote a dialogue on free will[1172]. A sermon by him is preserved in Merton College, MS. 248, f. 170. He flourished about 1340. A Dominican of the same name was S.T.P. of Paris in the thirteenth century[1173]. Among the MSS. mentioned in the old catalogue (1381) at Assisi[1174], is a ‘Summa mag. fratris Laurentii Vualensis Anglici ordinis Minorum;’ this is perhaps a mistake for Johannes Wallensis.

56. John de Rudinton or Rodyngton belonged to the custody[Pg 172] of Oxford, and the convent of Stamford[1175]. He was D.D. of Oxford[1176], nineteenth Provincial Minister of England[1177], and is described in the Register of the Grey Friars of London as ‘vir sanctissimus[1178].’ He was buried at Bedford[1179]; Bale and his followers mention 1348, the date of the first great pestilence, as the year of his death.

Joannes Rodinchon in lib. i. Sententiarum.

Johannis de Rodynton determinationes theologicae.

Quaestiones super quartum librum Sententiarum (by the same author?).

Questiones super quodlibeta rodincon.

57. John de Howden (c. 1340).

[John Hoveden of London, S.T.P. and author of many works, was not a friar; he died A. D. 1275: Tanner, Bibl. 415.]

58. T. Stanschaw, called by Brewer, G. Stanforth[1181], by others, Thomas Stanchaw, Straveshaw, &c., was a Minorite of Bristol[1182]. Bale says:

59. Edmund Grafton.

60. Stephen Sorel.

61. Adam Wodham or Godham was one of the most famous of the later Franciscan schoolmen[1185]. He is said to have lived chiefly at[Pg 173] Norwich, London, and Oxford[1186], and was probably reader in theology at several convents in succession. He was a follower of William of Ockham in philosophy and probably attended his lectures. He may be the Adam to whom Ockham’s Summa logices was addressed[1187]. The date of his lecturing as regent master at Oxford is unknown; it must have been about 1340 or soon after. He was perhaps the ‘Frater Adam magister in sacra theologia de Anglia,’ who went to Basel in 1339 to consult Friar James de Porta on some miracles alleged to have been wrought there[1188]. He died, if we may believe Bale, at Babwell in 1358[1189].

Comment. in IV libros Sententiarum, abbreviated by Henry of Oyta. Inc. prol. ‘Ista est lex Adam.’

Quaestiones variae philosophicae et theologicae, by Godham and others[1191].

Comment, super Cantica Canticorum.

Postilla super Ecclesiasticum, Lib. I.

Determinationes, or, Determinationes XI. Inc. ‘Utrum officina.’

[Pg 174]62. Robert de Redclive.

63. Thomas Radford (cf. 51st master).

64. John Went or Gwent was a native of the Bristol custody[1193]. He probably incepted in theology and lectured to the Friars at Oxford about 1340 or soon after. His character for holiness was such that he was believed to have wrought miracles in his lifetime[1194]. He succeeded John de Rodyngton as Provincial Minister, being the twentieth in Order, probably between 1340 and 1350[1195]. Bale adds:

It is however not improbable that he found only the first statement in the register and added the date. Both the catalogues of the Provincial Ministers state that he was buried at Hereford[1197].

65. Thomas Oterborne can hardly have written the chronicle generally ascribed to him. The chronicle itself bears no marks of having been written by a Franciscan; even the notices of the Order given in Walsingham and the Eulogium Historiarum are sometimes omitted, and usually shortened, in the so-called Otterbourne. But apart from this, the evidence of dates is fairly conclusive: the chronicle, as edited by Hearne, leaves off abruptly in the year 1420, and Hearne puts Otterbourne’s death at 1421. Pits and Wood suppose from MSS. which end in 1411 that the writer died in that year. Hearne says

But even assuming the existence of such MSS. it is practically impossible that they can have been the work of the Franciscan doctor. Thomas Oterborne must have lectured at Oxford before 1350. It is true that the last nine names of lectors given in the list are in a more recent hand than the earlier ones; but the names of Went and Oterborne are in the same writing, and there can be no reasonable doubt that they were contemporaries. The dates of Oterborne’s two immediate successors at Oxford are unknown[1198], and the list of lectors here comes to an end. We cannot therefore know whether there were any more lectors before Simon Tunstede. Assuming that he was the[Pg 175] sixty-eighth lector, we may naturally conclude that the sixty-fifth read several years before him, i.e. several years before 1351 when Simon was ‘regent among the Minorites at Oxford[1199].’ It is therefore most probable that Thomas was reader not later than 1345. The historian was perhaps the Thomas Otterburn who became rector of Chingford in 1393 and was ordained priest in 1394[1200].

66. John Valeys[1201] was perhaps the Friar John Wells who took a prominent part in the disputed election to the Chancellorship in 1349, as a supporter of John Wyllyot, fellow of Merton, whose conduct seems to have been of a peculiarly riotous and lawless character[1202]. He may possibly be the John Welle, S.T.P. and Friar Minor[1203], who was robbed by his servant in London in 1377; some curious details about this affair will be found in Appendix B.

67. Richard Malevile of the London Custody (c. 1350?); this name is added in a still later hand.

[Pg 176]

CHAPTER III.

FRANCISCANS WHO STUDIED IN THE CONVENT AT OXFORD, OR HAD SOME OTHER CONNEXION WITH THE TOWN OR THE UNIVERSITY.

Agnellus or Angnellus of Pisa was custodian of Paris before becoming first Provincial of England[1204]. He is said to have been made Provincial by St. Francis in 1219[1205]; the order as given by Francis a S. Clara[1206] is as follows:

It may be doubted whether this letter is authentic, nor is the date beyond dispute. It may be considered as certain that Agnellus did not come to England till September 1224[1207]. He was then a deacon, and about thirty years of age[1208]. He landed with eight others at Dover, went to Canterbury, and thence to London, establishing houses and receiving novices. Such was his humility that he long refused the order of priesthood, and only at length consented, when the Provincial Chapter had procured a command from the General Chapter, that the order should be conferred on him[1209]. He was a zealous guardian of the primitive poverty of the Rule of St. Francis, and would only allow houses to be built or areas to be enlarged where it was absolutely necessary[1210]. He urged the demolition of a conventual building called Valvert at Paris, and forbade the enlargement of the house at Gloucester: he had the infirmary at Oxford built so low that a man could[Pg 177] scarcely stand upright in it. He built a school at Oxford of more generous proportions, and encouraged the love of learning in the Order[1211]. The choice of Grostete as the first master of the Minorites was due to Agnellus[1212]. He was, according to Matthew Paris, on familiar terms with the King, and was one of his counsellors[1213]. In December, 1233, he offered his services as peace-maker between Henry III and the rebellious Earl Marshall, though his efforts to induce the latter to submit were unavailing[1214]. It would seem to have been after this that he went to Rome on some business of the English prelates[1215], and he may also at the same time have attended a General Chapter in Italy[1216]. On his return, he was seized with dysentery at Oxford; it was believed that his health had never recovered from the severities to which he was exposed while labouring for peace in the winter of 1233[1217]. He recommended that the General Minister, Elias, should be requested to appoint Albert of Pisa, or Haymo, or Radulf of Rheims, as his successor. He constituted Peter of Tewkesbury his Vicar, and made his last confession to him. He died at Oxford in great pain, crying continually, ‘Veni, dulcissime Jesu.’ The exact date of his death is uncertain; it was probably early in 1235[1218]. He was, says Eccleston,

He was buried in a wooden or leaden coffin in the choir of the chapel before the altar. When this chapel was superseded by the larger church, the friars came by night to remove the body; they found the coffin and the grave

His bones were laid with due pomp in ‘a fair stone sepulchre’ in the new church, and the miracles which were wrought at his tomb were a source of honour and profit to the Convent at Oxford[1220].

[Pg 178]Richard de Ingewrthe or Indewurde (Norfolk) is named second in the list of friars who came over with Agnellus in 1224. He was a priest and advanced in years; according to Eccleston he was the first Minorite who preached to the people ‘citra montes.’ With three other friars he established the first house of Franciscans in London (at Cornhill); he then proceeded to Oxford with Richard of Devon, hired a house of Robert le Mercer in St. Ebbe’s, and thus founded the original convent in the University town. The two companions then went on to Northampton, where they again hired a house and founded a friary. Richard of Ingewrthe afterwards became custodian of Cambridge, which was specially noted for its poverty under his rule. In 1230, when Agnellus attended the General Chapter at Assisi, he was associated in the Vicariate of the English Province with Henry de Ceruise or Treviso, a lay-brother from Lombardy. Soon after this he was sent by the General, John Parens, as Provincial Minister to Ireland. At length he was released from the office in General Chapter by Albert of Pisa (c. 1239), set out as a missionary to Palestine, and died there[1221].

Richard of Devon, a young acolyte, was the third of those who came over with Agnellus. He accompanied R. of Ingewrthe from Canterbury to London, Oxford, and Northampton;

Adam of Oxford was a master before he entered the Order[1223]. The account of his conversion given by Eccleston[1224] is as follows:

He assumed the habit on January 25[1226], probably A. D. 1227. He was at this time assistant, or secretary[1227], to the great Adam Marsh, whom he soon afterwards induced to join the Franciscans. Shortly after this, Adam of Oxford went to Gregory IX, and was at his own desire sent to preach to the Saracens[1228]. From a letter of Grostete’s, addressed to Agnellus and the Convent of Friars Minors at Oxford, relating to this subject, and written in or before 1231[1229], we learn that Adam had formed the resolution of going to preach to the infidels before he entered the Order, and that he was induced to take this latter step partly because it was likely to add to his influence as a missionary. Grostete urges the Friars not to grieve for his loss:

He died at Barlete, and miracles are said to have been wrought by his relics or his memory[1230].

William of York, ‘a solemn bachelor,’ was probably an Oxford man, as he entered the Order on the same day as Adam of Oxford[1231].

Adam Rufus[1232] studied under Grostete in the early part of the thirteenth century, presumably at Oxford. A letter from ‘Robert Grostete called Master,’ written perhaps before he held any preferments, i.e. before 1210, addressed to ‘Master Adam Rufus,’ is extant; it is a treatise on the nature of angels, and Grostete asks Adam to inquire diligently the opinions of the wise men, with whom he converses, on the subject. In another letter written about 1237,[Pg 180] Grostete mentions having heard of Friar Ernulphus, papal penitentiary, from ‘Friar Adam Rufus of good memory,’ formerly his beloved pupil and friend. It may be inferred from his connexion with Grostete and Ernulphus or Arnulfus, Vicar of the Order of Minorites[1233], that the Order which he entered was that of the Franciscans.

Henry de Reresby, who entered the Order abroad, was vicar of the custodian of Oxford about 1235 or before. He was made first provincial of Scotland by Elias, but died before he could enter on his duties[1234]. According to Leland’s notes from Eccleston he died at Leicester; according to another account, at Acre in Norfolk[1235]. After his death he appeared to the custodian of Oxford, and said that,

Walter, a canon of Dunstable, and John, a novice of the same priory, escaped from their house through a broken window and joined the Franciscans at Oxford in 1233. Walter afterwards returned with three Minorites to the Chapter of Dunstable, seeking absolution. After submitting to corporal punishment, he was absolved; he was further ordered to restore the books and clothes (quaternos et pannos) which he had taken with him, and to deliberate for a year—i.e. during his noviciate—whether the discipline of the Order which he had entered was more severe than that of the Order he had left; if it were so, he was to remain a Minorite; if not, he was to return to Dunstable. John was found by the Prior of Dunstable at London and similarly absolved: he afterwards went to Rome[1237].

John of Reading, who became Abbat of Osney in 1229[1238], joined the Minorites in 1235, probably at Northampton[1239]. He is probably the Abbat to whom Bartholomew of Pisa refers as having assisted with his own hands at the building of the Franciscan Church at Oxford[1240]. He was certainly at Oxford about 1250, when Adam Marsh wrote[Pg 181] to the Provincial that he was in ill-health and requested that Friar Adam de Bechesoueres, the physician of the Order, might be sent to Oxford to attend him[1241]. Another ‘Frater Johannes Anglicus de Redingis’ was Visitor of Germany in 1229, and Minister of Saxony 1230-1232[1242].

Albert of Pisa did not, as stated by Bartholomew of Pisa and others, accompany Agnellus to England. He was (according to Eccleston) Minister of Hungary, Germany (1223-1227), Bologna, the March of Ancona, the March of Treviso, Tuscany, perhaps of Spain in 1227[1243]. He was one of the three recommended by Agnellus as fit persons to succeed him as Provincial of England, but he was not appointed by Elias till almost a year after the death of the first Minister[1244] (c. 1236). He reached England on December 13, and celebrated a Provincial Chapter at Oxford on February 2[1245]. On another occasion Eccleston tells us—

Soon after his arrival, Albert appointed lecturers at London and Canterbury[1247], though he does not appear to have been a learned man himself. His connexion with Oxford was slight, and his acts as Provincial can hardly claim a place here. After remaining two years and a half in England, he went to Rome to take part in the proceedings against Elias[1248]. On the deposition of the latter (May 15, 1239), Albert was elected Minister General. He died in the same or the following year[1249] and was buried at Rome[1250].

[Pg 182]Ralph of Maidstone, bishop of Hereford 1234-1239, resigned his see in December, 1239, and was admitted into the Franciscan Order by Haymo[1251]. He took this step in accordance with a vow, made perhaps before he became bishop[1252]. It is uncertain at which convent he took the habit. Bartholomew of Pisa states that he helped with his own hands to build the church at Oxford[1253]. It is not improbable that he was there for some time. He was a Master of Paris, noted for his learning, and was among the ‘famous Englishmen’ who left Paris owing to the disputes in 1229 and settled at Oxford on the invitation of Henry III[1254]. According to a later addition in one of the MSS. of Eccleston’s Chronicle, he lived five years after assuming the habit, staying for the most part in the convent of Gloucester[1255]. The Dunstable Annals state that he was, for a time at any rate, rendered incapable by a fall from a rock, but whether this took place before or after he became a friar is not quite clear[1256]. He died at Gloucester (c. 1245) and

A most interesting relic of the friar-bishop is now in the British Museum. Royal MS. 3 C. xi, a copy of the New Testament with gloss (sec. xiii), belonged to the Friars Minors of Canterbury,

He wrote a Commentary on the Sentences when he was Archdeacon of Chester (c. A. D. 1220). This is mentioned in a treatise on the Sacraments, ‘secundum Mag. R. de Maidinstan archidiaconum Cestrensem super Sententias.’

William of Nottingham was marked out by nature for a Mendicant Friar.

William’s brother, Augustine, was also a Minorite; he was first in the household of Innocent IV, accompanied the Patriarch of Antioch, the pope’s nephew, to Syria, and at length became bishop of Laodicea[1259]. William himself successfully championed the interests of his Order against the Dominicans at the Roman Curia[1260]. At one period he lived for some time in the Franciscan convent at Rome, where, though (to quote his own words)

He acted as vicar for Friar Haymo in England (1239), and in 1240 was himself

He had never held any subordinate office, such as that of custodian or warden[1263]. He was a diligent student of the Scriptures, and seems to have attended Grostete’s lectures at Oxford[1264]. As minister, he was energetic in furthering the study of theology, and in developing the educational organization of the Franciscans in England[1265]. During his ministry, the friary at Oxford was greatly enlarged[1266]. Evidence of his popularity was given in the Chapter held at Oxford by the General Minister, John of Parma (c. 1248), when the friars unanimously refused to sanction his deposition[1267]. He was ‘absolved’ from the ministry in the General Chapter of Metz, and sent on behalf of the Order to the Pope[1268]. It was probably in this Chapter, that, with the assistance of John Kethene and Gregory de Bosellis, he carried a decree ‘almost against the whole Chapter,’

The cause of his deposition is unknown, but the event excited the displeasure of the English friars, who called a Provincial Chapter and unanimously re-elected him[1270]. A letter from Adam Marsh, congratulating him on this second election and urging him not to decline the office is extant[1271]. But William of Nottingham was already dead. When he reached Genoa on his mission to the Pope, his socius, Friar Richard, was struck down by the plague;

The date of the Chapter of Metz, and consequently of William’s death, is not quite certain; it was probably in the spring or early summer of 1251[1273]. A few extracts from the chronicle of Eccleston (who knew him personally) will illustrate the character of the man.

He represented the tendency to a less strict interpretation of the Rule in regard to money than had hitherto obtained in England, holding that—

[Pg 185]The following story may be regarded as an instance of his cynicism or knowledge of human nature:—

That the well-known Commentary on the Gospels, called also Unum ex quatuor, or De concordia evangelistarum, by Friar William of Nottingham, was by this William, and not by his namesake, the seventeenth provincial of the English Minorites[1277], is proved by Eccleston’s words (Mon. Franc. I, p. 70)—

The commentary was founded on the work of Clement of Langthon[1278], and the number of MSS. of it still in existence attest its popularity in the Middle Ages.

The work comprised 12 parts. Inc. ‘Da mihi intellectum.’

Comment. in Longobardum, perhaps by the other W. of Nottingham.

A. of Hereford (c. 1248) was assigned by the Provincial to Adam Marsh as his secretary. Adam thought him too able a man to be kept[Pg 186] in this subordinate position; his learning and eloquence marked him out for a teacher and preacher; many of those appointed by the Provincial Chapter to lecture on theology were far inferior to him. In addition to this his health would not stand the constant strain to which the secretary of the indefatigable doctor was necessarily subjected. Adam therefore requested the Provincial to send him to London to pursue his studies, as A. of Hereford himself desired[1279].

Laurence de Sutthon was the friar whom Adam Marsh suggested to the Provincial as A. of Hereford’s successor. A ‘Friar Laurence’ was with Adam in 1249, and the latter wrote to Thomas of York, probably after 1250:

Hugo de Lyndun seems to have been a weak brother at Oxford—weak in mind and body—whom Adam Marsh took under his especial care (c. 1253)[1281].

John of Beverley was a friar at Oxford when Martin was warden, and was known to Adam Marsh. Friar Thomas of York laboured for the salvation of the father of this J. of Beverley[1282].

Gregory de Bosellis was the first lecturer to the friars at Leicester[1283] (c. 1240?). He was at the General Chapter of Genoa (1244) or Metz when he supported W. of Nottingham, Minister of England[1284]; and he was Vicar of the Province at the time of the same Minister’s death[1285]. He was with the Earl and Countess of Leicester in Gascony[1286], and went to the papal court with the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1250[1287], when the rules of the Order against riding on horseback were relaxed in his favour[1288]. He had studied at some University, probably at Oxford, and was capable of filling Adam Marsh’s place as lecturer to the friars there, though it does not appear whether he ever actually did so[1289].

Thomas of Maydenstan, an invalid novice at Oxford, c. 1253;[Pg 187] Adam Marsh hearing a rumour that he was to be sent away from Oxford begged the Minister to let him remain,

The brethren at Oxford joined in the request[1290].

Thomas Bachun of the Convent of Nottingham was recommended by Adam Marsh as a suitable person to act as private secretary or amanuensis to Friar Richard of Cornwall, when the latter was about to proceed to Paris, 1252. It is however uncertain whether he was appointed or whether he studied at Oxford[1291].

Adam de Bechesoueres or Hekeshovre[1292] occurs several times in Adam Marsh’s letters as the chief physician among the early English friars. Thus at one time Adam writes to John of Stamford, custodian of Oxford, requesting him to allow a poor sick scholar named Ralph of Multon, a friend of the writer’s, to consult Friar A. de Bechesoueres, who has already done him good. The famous Walter de Merton went to him once with a letter of introduction from Adam Marsh. He was wanted again at Oxford to attend Friar John of Reading, formerly Abbat of Osney. Adam Marsh recommended Grostete to consult him about his health. At another time we hear of him going to the General Minister in France, with a ‘supplicatory letter’ from Adam Marsh;

N. of Anivers, Anilyeres or Aynelers, a youth of ability, fair learning and great promise, was ordered by the Minister General to go to France, probably about the year 1248. Adam Marsh, anxious that the best should be done both for the young friar and the Order, after consultation with Peter of Tewkesbury, custodian of Oxford, obtained leave from the Provincials of England and France for him to stay for a year or two in England, the consent of the General being also secured:

N. de Anivers was therefore allowed to spend a year in theological[Pg 188] study at Oxford, Cambridge or London. Adam Marsh maintained his interest in his welfare, and, after the year was over, requested the Minister of France to allow him to continue his studies in England up to the ensuing Pentecost: it is probable that he was a pupil of Adam’s at Oxford[1293].

William of Pokelington (Yorkshire) entered the Order about 1250 and made his profession at Oxford in 1251[1294]. He was then a master. Shortly before this he had been ill and perhaps took the vows on his recovery[1295]. He was an intimate friend of Adam Marsh and at one period acted as his secretary[1296]. Adam employed him several times as messenger to Grostete[1297], who had a high opinion of him and liked to have him as a companion[1298].

Walter de Madele, Maddele or Maddeley studied in the Franciscan Convent at Oxford (c. 1235 seq.). While here, he ventured to disregard the custom which forbade the friars to wear shoes.

Walter was ‘socius’ or secretary to Agnellus and was at Oxford at the time of the latter’s death (1235)[1300]. Later he was in Germany with Peter of Tewkesbury, minister of Cologne, and returned to England in 1249 with Friar Paulinus, perhaps a German, in obedience to Peter[1301]. He enjoyed a considerable reputation as a theologian and was lecturer at a Franciscan Convent. Adam Marsh once sent for him to come and see him at Oxford.

This was not the only subject discussed at the interview. The English Minister suspected Walter of a desire to go abroad and of having obtained from the General the promise of a lectureship in some foreign convent or University. The Provincial had indeed just received an order from the General to send some English friars to teach at Paris, and perhaps Madele’s name was mentioned. Madele however denied the imputation, and Adam recommended the Provincial to keep him in England, sending other friars to Paris, and to remedy his grievances. Though he had long taught theology with success, no competent provision had been made for him; he had not only to exhaust his mind by studies but also to wear out his body by writing daily with his own hand, as he lacked the ‘great volumes and the assistance of companions,’ which had been provided for his predecessors in the office. Eccleston refers to him as dead when he wrote his chronicle[1303]. None of Madele’s writings[1304] have been preserved.

G. of St. Edmund: Adam Marsh wrote to the Provincial (W. of Nottingham) on behalf of Martin the warden and the other friars at Oxford, requesting him to order without delay

Thomas of Eccleston, the earliest historian of the Franciscan Order in England, was probably a native of Lancashire[1306]. All that is known of him is contained in his Chronicle. He was an inmate of the London Convent when William of Nottingham was minister (1240-1250), and speaks from his own experience of the poverty and hard fare of the brethren there[1307]. He was a student at Oxford in the lifetime of Grostete, whether before or after the latter became bishop is not clear[1308]. He knew the earliest converts to the Order in England, and enjoyed the intimacy of William of Nottingham[1309]. His history is dedicated to Friar Simon of Esseby—perhaps Ashby in Norfolk or Lincolnshire[1310]. In the preface he states that he had been[Pg 190] collecting and arranging materials for twenty-five years, and explains his object in writing.

Other Orders have lives of their holy brethren; this Chronicle is intended similarly to edify the Franciscans by giving them some account of those who have sacrificed their all to enter the Order and observe the Rule of St. Francis[1311]. From this point of view, chronology was of little importance, and there is scarcely a date in the whole book. It is impossible to give the exact date at which the Chronicle was finished; the deaths of William of Nottingham and of Innocent IV are mentioned[1312]; and the work was probably not completed before 1260. It is certainly the narrative of a contemporary, often of an eye-witness, and, apart from the manifest sincerity of the author, the accuracy of the details can in some instances be tested by independent and trustworthy authority. To take one example; Eccleston’s account of the reception of the friars at Cambridge (pp. 17, 18) may be compared with the following entry in Close Roll 22 Hen. III, m. 12, (June 15 1238):

The following MSS. of the Chronicle ‘De adventu Fratrum Minorum in Angliam’ are extant, all dating from the early fourteenth century.

Roger Bacon is said on the authority of John Rous[1313] to have been born at or near Ilchester in Dorsetshire. He came of a wealthy perhaps noble family; he speaks of one brother as rich, of another as a scholar. He was probably nephew of Robert Bacon the Dominican. Roger’s family espoused the royal cause in the Barons’ war and suffered great losses[1314]. The year 1214 is usually given as the date of his birth. The date is an inference from the following passage written in 1267:

The last phrase probably means ‘at a University’ or some place of study. Boys of ten or twelve years frequently began their education at Oxford, and it is likely that Bacon went there at an early age[1316]. Roger of Wendover relates that Friar Robert Bacon preached before the King at Oxford in 1233, and fearlessly rebuked him for listening to evil counsellors, especially Peter des Roches. Matthew Paris gives the story with the following addition:

It cannot be regarded as certain that this Roger Bacon was the[Pg 192] famous friar. The name was not uncommon; e.g. a Roger Bacon, a Thomas Bacon, and a Peter Bacon occur in Pat. Roll 3 Edw I. On the other hand Roger was certainly in Oxford in or before this year. He states that St. Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, lectured at Oxford in his time, i.e. Edmund Riche who became Archbishop in 1233[1318]. At this period too, Roger attended Grostete’s lectures and made the acquaintance of Adam Marsh, for both of whom he always retained the greatest admiration. He found in them that sympathy with and understanding of his experimental method, which were denied him in later life[1319]. It was doubtless his connexion with these men that led Roger to enter the Franciscan Order. When or where this took place is unknown: perhaps at Oxford before the death of Grostete. He had clearly reached years of discretion when he took the step. This may be inferred from his denunciation of those who entered the Orders as boys and begun the study of theology before they had been grounded in philosophy[1320]. It is also implied in such passages as these:

He began his studies on positive science before 1250[1322], and had by 1267 spent more than 2,000 librae[1323]

It is not necessary to assume that this sum was expended before he joined the Franciscan Order; he could, and undoubtedly did, obtain money by begging to carry on his experiments[1324]. Roger left Oxford for Paris some time before 1245; he states that he had seen Alexander of Hales with his own eyes[1325], and he heard William of Auvergne[Pg 193] dispute on the Intellectus Agens before the whole University: William died in 1248[1326]. Roger was in France in 1250 when he saw the chief of the Pastoureaux, and remarked that

He is said by Rous to have been made D.D. of Paris and to have been incorporated as D.D. at Oxford[1328]. When he returned to Oxford is unknown; probably soon after 1250. He must have lectured at this time; he won some fame, as he says himself[1329], but without doubt made many enemies. About the year 1257 or 1258—when Adam Marsh could no longer protect his great pupil—Roger was exiled from England and kept under strict supervision in Paris for ten years[1330]. In 1263 he wrote an astronomical treatise called Computus Naturalium[1331]. Soon after this, a clerk named Raymund of Laon mentioned Bacon’s name to the Cardinal Bishop of Sabina and roused the latter’s interest in his discoveries[1332]. Bacon sent a letter in reply to the Cardinal’s communication: this has not been preserved. In 1265 the Cardinal became Pope Clement IV. On 22nd of June 1266, Clement wrote requesting Roger to send him a fair copy of the work which Raymond had mentioned, setting forth the remedies he proposed, ‘circa illa, quae nuper occasione tanti discriminis intimasti;’ the friar was to do this, in spite of any constitution of his Order to the contrary, secretly and without delay[1333]. The Pope’s supposition that the work was already written was erroneous;

However, although the book was not yet written, and notwithstanding endless difficulties, want of money, want of mathematical and other instruments and tables, the restrictions of the Rule, jealousy of his superiors and brethren who, he says,

the Opus Majus, the Opus Minus, and the Opus Tertium, were sent to the Pope within fifteen or eighteen months after the arrival of the papal mandate[1337]. ‘Such a feat’ says Brewer, ‘is unparalleled in the annals of literature.’ The Pope probably used his influence in behalf of Roger, as the latter seems to have returned to England about this time and to have been freed from annoyance[1338]. The works sent to Clement he regarded merely as handbooks; at the same time that he was writing them, he was engaged on a larger work which was to embrace the whole range of sciences as then understood[1339]. He was working at this in 1271[1340]. His attacks on all classes, including his own Order, became even more violent than hitherto. In 1277 and 1278 synods were held at Paris and Oxford to condemn erroneous doctrines. The repressive movement extended to the Franciscans; in 1278, Jerome of Ascoli, the Minister General, held a Chapter at Paris, and among other friars Roger Bacon was condemned ‘propter quasdam novitates[1341].’ He is believed to have remained in prison for fourteen years. Jerome of Ascoli, who became Pope Nicholas IV in 1288, died in 1292. Raymond Gaufredi, a man of liberal views, was elected General in 1289, and released many friars who had been imprisoned for their opinions by his predecessors. In 1292 he held a General Chapter at Paris, and it is probable that among the friars here set free was Roger Bacon[1342].[Pg 195] It is certain that the last work of Roger’s of which we have any notice was written in 1292[1343]. The date usually assigned for his death (1294) is a pure conjecture[1344]. John Rous says that he was buried among the Friars Minors at Oxford[1345].

Such then is the chronological outline of his life, as far as it can be ascertained. A list of his works will be more useful than a short account of his character or philosophy.

Roger Bacon’s Works were neglected and regarded with a pious horror in the Middle Ages[1346]. The result is that many of those which have survived at all have reached us in a fragmentary state. ‘It is easier,’ said Leland, ‘to collect the leaves of the Sibyl than the titles of the works written by Roger Bacon.’ The difficulty has to a considerable extent been removed by Mr. Brewer’s valuable preface to the Opera Inedita, and by the labours of M. Charles. The following account of Roger Bacon’s works is based chiefly on these two writers. Some additions have been made and some rearrangement attempted.

Miscellaneous works, lectures, &c., probably early:—

Computus naturalium, an astronomical treatise, is the earliest work of Bacon’s to which a date can be assigned; it was written A. D. 1263-4. Inc. ‘Omnia tempus habent.’

[Pg 196]

De termino Paschali, an earlier work, to which Bacon refers in the Computus naturalium; (Charles, p. 78).

Questions on Aristotle’s physics.

Quaestiones super librum physicorum a magistro dicto Bacon.

De vegetabilibus (gloss on this work then attributed to Aristotle).

In Aristotelis Metaphysica.

Tractatus ad declaranda quaedam obscure dicta in libro Secreti Secretorum Aristotelis. Inc. ‘Propter multa in hoc libro contenta qui liber dicitur Secretum Secretorum Aristotelis sive liber de regimine principum.’

Questiones naturales mathematice astronomice, &c. ‘Expliciunt reprobationes Rogeri Baconis.’

Bacon in Meteora. Inc. ‘Cum ad noticiam impressionum habendam.’

Processus fratris Rogeri Bacon ... de invencione cogitacionis (astrological fragment). Inc. ‘Notandum quod in omni judicio quatuor sunt inquirenda, scil. natura planetae.’

De somno et vigilia.

Logic:—

Summulae Dialectices, an elementary treatise on logic, characterised by Charles, who expresses a doubt as to its authenticity, as very dry, unimportant, and intended for lecturing purposes. Inc. ‘Introductio est brevis et apta demonstratio.’ ‘Expliciunt sumule magistri Roberti (sic) Baccun.’

Syncategoremata. Inc. ‘Partium orationis quaedam sunt declinabiles.’

[Pg 197]

Summa de sophismatibus et distinctionibus. Inc. ‘Potest queri de difficultatibus accidentibus.’

Tractatus de signis logicalibus. Inc. ‘Signum est in predicamento relationis.’

Opus Majus, written A. D. 1266-1267; 7 parts. Inc. ‘Sapientiae perfecta consideratio consistit in duobus.’

The parts often occur separately.

I. On the four causes of human ignorance: authority, custom, popular opinion, and the pride of supposed knowledge.

II. On the causes of perfect wisdom in Holy Scripture, or, On the dignity of philosophy.

III. On the usefulness of grammar.

IV. On the usefulness of mathematics.

V. Perspective and Optics.

VI. Experimental Science.

VII. Moral Philosophy. Inc. ‘Manifestavi in precedentibus quod cognitio linguarum.’

Opus Minus, written in 1266-7, was mainly an abstract of the Opus Majus with some additions on the state of scholasticism, on alchemy practical and speculative, and on astronomy. Charles gives the following description of it. It consisted of 6 parts:

i. Introduction or dedicatory letter; ii. Practical alchemy; iii. Explanation of the Opus Majus; the order of the sciences inverted, i.e. they were arranged according to their dignity, moral philosophy first; iv. Treatise on the seven sins of Theology; v. Speculative alchemy, or, De rerum generationibus (see below); vi. De Coelestibus.

Of this work only the fragment edited by Brewer (Opera Ined.[Pg 199] 311-390) from MS. Bodl. Digby 218, has been discovered. This includes a few pages of Part ii., all of iii., most of iv., and part of v. Wood quotes a passage from the Opus Minus which does not occur in this fragment (Opera Ined. xciv. n. 1). From this it has been assumed that he had access to a MS. of the Opus Minus now lost; but the passage is quoted by Leland, and probably copied from him by Wood. It may perhaps occur in some other work of Bacon’s; thus the passage quoted in Op. Ined. pp. xcvii-xcviii, from which Brewer argues that ‘Wood must have seen some other copy of the Opus Minus not now discoverable,’ occurs in Brewer’s edition of the Opus Tert. pp. 272-3.

Part of the blank on p. 375 is to be filled up from the Opus Majus, Pars VI, Exemplum II, where the passage ‘Est autem—curabit et’ occurs, word for word. How much of the Opus Majus was here inserted is doubtful; probably to the end of Exemplum II. Thus MS. Bodl. Canonic. Miscell. 334, f. 53, begins with the words, ‘Corpora vero Adae et Evae,’ Opus Minus, p. 373, and leaves off with the words, ‘et alibi multis modis,’ which occur at the end of Opus Majus, Pars VI, Exemp. II.

The last part of the Opus Minus is wholly wanting in Brewer’s edition. The subject of this part may be gathered from Bacon’s words in Opus Tert., cap. xxvi (p. 96):

In Digby MS. 76, fol. 36 seq. (sec. xiii) is a treatise on this subject, forming part of the Physics in the great Compendium Philosophiae (see below). It is not improbable, that, before being incorporated in this larger work, it formed part of the Opus Minus sent to the Pope; on fol. 42 are the words:

Opus Tertium, written in 1267 (see Opera Ined. p. 277), 75 chapters.

[Pg 200]Charles has been misled by a passage in the work called ‘Communia Naturalium’ into thinking that this latter formed part of the Opus Tertium; Charles, R. Bacon, pp. 65, 83-4; his description of Opus Tertium is consequently erroneous. The passage is from the Mazarine MS. of the Communia Naturalium (i.e. No. 3576), fol. 85:

These words refer to Bacon’s doctrine that the intellectus agens is not part of the soul, but God and angels. This is insisted on in the Opus Tertium, cap. xxiii, and it is not likely that Bacon would do more than refer to it again casually in the course of the same work. The relation of the Opus Tertium to the Commun. Nat. is probably as follows: the latter was written or begun first. Bacon repeatedly mentions that he was, while writing his three Opera for the Pope, engaged on a larger work, Scriptum Principale, which he did not send to Clement[1349]. Much of this larger work naturally found its way, probably in a summarised form, into the Opus Tertium as we know it, the treatise actually sent to the Pope.

Tractatus de multiplicatione specierum, or, De generatione specierum et multiplicatione et corruptione earum, is inserted by Jebb in the Opus Majus, pp. 358-445, between Part v and Part vi. The subject is however discussed in Part iv, which is often quoted or referred to in Part v. In the De multiplicatione, &c. (p. 368), are the words:

Again (p. 358):

There is nothing about this in the third part of the Opus Majus; but it is found in the Communia Naturalium. The treatise De multiplicatione specierum was therefore part of a work of which the Communia Naturalium formed the third part. This large work was according to Jebb, the Opus Minus; according to Charles, the Opus Tertium[1350]; according to Brewer, the encyclopaedic Compendium[Pg 201] Philosophiae. Brewer is no doubt right; the De multiplicatione was intended as a sub-section of the great treatise on Physics.

How then did the treatise come to be regarded as part of the Opus Majus, and to be inserted in the MSS. of that work? There can be little doubt that it was, in its original form, the treatise on rays sent to the Pope with the Opus Majus, but as a separate work (Opera Ined. pp. 227, 230). The references to the Communia Naturalium are not inconsistent with this hypothesis: (1) the treatise on rays does not seem to have been written specially for the Pope, and consequently references to works which he could not know were not unnatural; (2) Bacon had already begun the encyclopaedic work, but found it impossible to get it finished or send it to the Pope (Opera Inedita, pp. 60, 315).

Inc. ‘Primum igitur capitulum circa influentiam agentis habet tres veritates.’

De speculis (on burning mirrors). Inc. ‘Ex concavis speculis ad solem positis ignis accenditur.’

Speculi Abnukefi compositio secundum Rogerium Bacon. Inc. ‘Quia universorum quos de speculis ad datam distanciam.’

Compendium Philosophiae, an encyclopaedic work, which if completed would have formed a kind of revised and enlarged edition of the Opus Majus, Opus Minus, and Opus Tertium. In the Communia Naturalium, cap. i. (MS. Bodl. Digby 70) Bacon gives a sketch of his plan. The work was to consist of four volumes, and to treat of six branches of knowledge, viz., vol. i. Grammar and Logic; vol. ii. Mathematics; vol. iii. Physics; vol. iv. Metaphysics and Morals. This Compendium seems to have been known also as Liber sex scientiarum. The latter title is found in the collection printed at Frankfurt in 1603[1351] in MSS. Bodl. Canonic. Misc. No. 334, fol. 49 b; ibid., No. 480, fol. 33; and E Musaeo 155, p. 689. In each of these MSS. the same passage is quoted, as follows:

Charles identifies the Liber sex scientiarum with the Opus Minus; but this passage does not occur in the extant portion of the Opus Minus which deals with the same subject and expresses the same ideas (Opera Ined., p. 370 seq.). It seems probable therefore that this passage is an extract from the section on Alchemy in vol. iii. of the Compendium Philosophiae.

Vol. I. Grammar and Logic. A portion of this has been edited by Brewer, Opera Ined., pp. 393-519, under the title Compendium Studii Philosophiae. It was written in 1271, and contains an introduction on the value of knowledge and the impediments to it, and the beginning of a treatise on grammar.

Two other treatises on grammar by Roger Bacon are extant, and probably formed part of the Comp. Phil.[1352]:

(1) Inc. ‘Primus hic liber voluminis grammatici circa linguas alias a Latino.... Manifestata laude et declarata utilitate cognitionis grammatice’ (chiefly on Greek grammar).

(2) Inc. ‘Oratio grammatica autem fit mediante verbo.’ ‘Explicit summa de grammatica magistri Rogeri Bacon.’

Vol. II. Mathematics; 6 books:

i. Communia mathematicae, ii-vi. Special branches of mathematics.

[Pg 203]Liber i. Inc. ‘Hic incipit volumen verae mathematicae habens sex libros. Primus est de communibus mathematicae, et habet tres partes principales.’

Libri ii-vi. An extant fragment of a commentary on Euclid by Bacon may have belonged to this part; in De Coelestibus (Comp. Phil. vol. iii.) he often refers to his commentary on the Elements of Euclid (Charles, p. 85).

A treatise, De laudibus mathematicae, expressing the same ideas as Part iv. of the Opus Majus, may have been intended as an introduction to this volume.

Vol. III. Physics. First came general physics (1 book), then particular sciences (3 books).

Liber i. Communia Naturalium, divided into 4 parts.

Libri ii, iii, iv. The special natural sciences, according to the Royal MS. just quoted, were treated in three books. They were[Pg 204] seven[1353] in number, as Bacon enumerates them in the second chapter of the first part of the Communia Naturalium.

Liber ii. (1) Optics or Perspective (a version of the De multiplicatione specierum). Inc. ‘Ostensum quippe in principio hujus Compendii Philosophiae.’

(2) Astronomy, or, De coelo et mundo.

(3) Gravity, Scientia ponderum de gravibus et levibus.

Liber iii. (4) Alchemy, or, De elementis[1354].

Liber iv. De vegetabilibus et generabilibus[1355].

(5) Agriculture.

(6) Medicine.

(7) Experimental Science.

Vol. IV. Metaphysics and Morals.

Inc. ‘Quoniam intencio principalis est innuere nobis vicia studii theologici que contracta sunt ex curiositate philosophie.’

[Pg 205]

It is, however, probable that these MS. fragments ought to be referred to Bacon’s last work, the Compendium Studii Theologiae, rather than to the Compendium Philosophiae.

Compendium studii theologiae, Bacon’s last work, bears the date 1292 (‘usque ad hunc annum Domini 1292’). Extracts from it are printed by Charles, pp. 410-416. This work consisted of six parts or more.

Part i. On the causes of error.

Part ii. Logic and grammar in reference to theology.

According to this MS. the work consisted of two parts:

Part v. is preserved in Royal MS. 7 F. viii. f. 2 (sec. xiii) (almost complete); it is a treatise on optics.

Part vi. is mentioned in Part v.: it is to be a treatise, ‘De multiplicatione Specierum.’

In Part iv. also the words ‘in partibus sequentibus’ occur.

Alchemy was treated in the Opus Minus and in the Compendium Philosophiae. Bacon divides it into (1) Speculative alchemy, ‘the science of the generation of things from elements’; (2) Practical alchemy, ‘which teaches us how to make noble metals and colours,’ &c., and the art of prolonging life (Opus Tertium, cap. xii). Wood mentions a treatise of Bacon’s De rerum generationibus, of which he[Pg 206] had seen two copies varying much. These may have been the versions in the Opus Minus[1356] and the Compendium Philosophiae[1357]. A number of works on alchemy and medicine ascribed to Bacon have been preserved, some of them are undoubtedly genuine, others apocryphal.

Epistolae fratris Rogerii Baconis de secretis operibus artis et naturae et de nullitate magiae [or, De mirabili potestate artis et naturae].

The work consists of a letter or collection of letters in ten or eleven chapters, the last five of which Charles considers doubtful, addressed perhaps to William of Auvergne (who died in 1248), or to John of London, whom Charles identifies with John of Basingstoke (d. 1252).

Inc. cap. 1. ‘Vestrae petitioni respondeo diligenter. Nam licet.’

The three following treatises were printed at Frankfurt in 1603, under the title, Sanioris medicinae magistri D. Rogeri Baconis angli de arte chymiae scripta, &c., and elsewhere.

Summary of Avicenna’s De anima. Inc. ‘In illius nomine qui major est.’

Breve Breviarium, or, De naturis metallorum in ratione alkimica et artificiali transformatione, or, Coelestis alchymia, or, De naturis metallorum et ipsorum transmutatione.

Divided into two parts, speculative and practical alchemy; the work contains no doubt some of the ideas incorporated in the Opus Minus and the Comp. Philosophiae. The date is uncertain.

Inc. ‘Breve breviarium breviter abbreviatum.’

Tractatus trium verborum, or, Epistolae tres ad Johannem Parisiensem; namely:

i. ‘De separatione ignis ab oleo,’ or, ‘De modo projectionis’; ii. ‘De modo miscendi’; iii. ‘De ponderibus.’ Inc. ‘Cum ego Rogerus rogatus a pluribus.’

[Pg 207]

Fragment on alchemy, without title.

Libellus Rogerii Baconi ... de retardandis senectutis accidentibus et de sensibus conservandis (11 chapters). This work is assigned by Charles to the year 1276. Inc. prol. ‘Domine mundi ex nobilissima stirpe originem assumpsistis.’ Inc. cap. 1. (De causis senectutis). ‘Senescente mundo senescunt homines.’

Antidotarius, a second part of this work. Inc. ‘Post completum universalis sciencie medicacionis tractatum.’

Liber Bacon de sermone rei admirabilis, sive de retardatione senectutis. Inc. ‘Intendo componere sermonem rei admirabilis domino meo fratri E, cujus vitam deus prolonget.’

De universali regimine senum et seniorum. Inc. ‘Summa regiminis senum universalis est hoc ut dicit Avicenna.’

De graduacione medicinarum compositarum. Inc. ‘Omnis forma inherens.’

Tractatus de erroribus medicorum[1358]. Inc. ‘Vulgus medicorum.’

[Pg 208]

Canones practici de medicinis compositis componendis, ‘Cap. i. Extractum de libro septimo Serapionis qui est antidotarium suum et est theoricum capitulum.’ (13 chapters.) Inc. ‘Necesse est illi qui vult componere medicinas.’ ‘Explicit tractatus de compositione medicinarum per fratrem rugerium bacon editus.’

De leone viridi (on the manufacture of mercury); only the summary by Raymund Gaufredi is extant. Inc. ‘Verbum abbreviatum.’

A number of works on alchemy are attributed to Roger Bacon erroneously or without any probability.

De consideratione quintae essentiae; 3 books.

The author was a Franciscan who entered the Order at Toulouse[1359]. Inc. opus. ‘Dixit Salomon sapientie cap. vii. Deus dedit mihi.’

De expulsione veneni. Inc. ‘Ista subscripta sequerentur post capitulum de hiis que expellunt venenum.’

Speculum alchemiae. Inc. ‘Multifariam multisque modis.’

[Pg 209]

Speculum alchemiae. Inc. ‘Speculum alchemiae quod in corde meo figuravi.’

Speculum secretorum, or, Liber secretorum. Inc. ‘In nomine Domini ... ad instructionem multorum circa hanc artem.’

Secretum secretorum naturae de laude lapidis Philosophorum. Inc. ‘Secretum secretorum naturae audiant secreti quae loquor.’

Rogerina major et minor, two medical treatises; neither by Bacon: one is by a Roger Baron.

De Magnete. Inc. ‘Amicorum intime, quamdam magnetis lapidis.’

Calendar, wrongly attributed to Bacon; made by a Minorite at Toledo 1297, and extracted from the Tabulae Toletanae.

Semita recta alchemiae (or, Liber duodecim aquarum).

Thesaurus spirituum, four treatises on the influence of planets, &c. Inc. ‘Hec est doctrina omnium experimentorum.’

[Pg 210]

De fistula.

Necromanciae. Inc. ‘Debes mundare manus et pedes ante visionem characterum.’

Other worthless recipes, fragments, &c., attributed to Bacon will be found in MSS:—

De intellectu et intelligentia, and De nutrimento, which Charles considers genuine, are printed among the works of Albertus Magnus.

Tractatus de veritate theologiae in septem partes distributus, perhaps by Robert Bacon. Inc. ‘Flecto genua mea ad patrem domini nostri Jesu Christi.’

Tractatus super Psalterium, probably by Robert Bacon.

Excerptiones Rogeri Bacon ex auctoribus musicae artis; or correctly, Excerptiones Hogeri abbatis, &c.

De sacrae scripturae profundis misteriis authore Rogero Bacon.

John, Roger Bacon’s favourite pupil, was certainly not John of London[1362], or John Peckham[1363]. On the other hand it is impossible to identify him with any known scholastic doctor. It is not certain whether he was a friar or whether he was ever at Oxford. About 1260 Roger Bacon found him probably at Paris, as a poor boy of fifteen eager to learn, but forced to beg his bread and to serve those who gave him the necessaries of life[1364].

The boy repaid his master’s care. Wishing to send a fit interpreter of his works to the Pope, Bacon writes[1366],

There was no one at Paris who knew so much of the roots of philosophy as did juvenis Johannes; he was ‘a virgin, not knowing mortal sin,’ and ‘an excellent keeper of secrets[1367].’ John was sent to Clement with the Opus Majus and other treatises[1368] in 1267, the other works, Opus Minus and Opus Tertium, being sent later and probably by other messengers. From this time we have no authentic information about him, and do not know whether he fulfilled Bacon’s expectations:

Robert de Ware, in Hertfordshire[1370], entered the Order at Oxford between 1265 and 1268. In the prologue of his only extant work,[Pg 212] addressed to his younger brother John, he gives the following account of his conversion[1371]:—

At length the father was stricken down by a mortal disease, and, warned in a vision, he relented towards his son. The latter was summoned hastily from London, and reconciled to his father, who before his death gave proof of his devotion to the Order of St. Francis.

Twenty-five discourses on the Virgin Mary, by friar Robert de Ware. Inc. prol. “Aue rosarium scripturarum per areolas.”

Walter de Landen, William Cornish, William de Wykham, Dyonisius, and Robert de Cap(e)ll, were Franciscans at Oxford, and took part in the controversy with the Dominicans in 1269. All that is known about them will be found in Appendix C.

Nicholas de Gulac was at Oxford in 1269. Suffering from stone and despairing of life, he at length prayed the Lord

On the next morning as he rose from his bed ‘ut commingeret,’ the stone fell at his feet, and he had no pain before or afterwards, being completely cured on Easter Tuesday, 1269; to this miracle witness was borne by the whole convent of Minorites at Oxford[1373].

Laurence of Cornwall, to whose miraculous recovery from fever, after prayer to Simon de Montfort, the same Friar N. de Gulac bore witness, was probably at Oxford about the same time[1374].

[Pg 213]Stephanus Hibernicus, called also Stephen of Exeter and Stephen of Oxford, was born in 1246, and became a Minorite at ‘Mutifernana’ in 1263. These facts are contained in the Annales Montis Fernandi (sive Minoritarum Multifernanae) ab a^o 45 usque ad an. 1274, the authorship of which is usually ascribed to Stephen[1375]. It is very doubtful whether he was at Oxford.

William of Ware, or William Warre, Guaro, Varro, &c., born at Ware in Hertfordshire, entered the Order in his youth, according to William Woodford[1376]. It is not improbable that he studied at Oxford, but there is no authority for the statement[1377]. He was S.T.P. of Paris, where most of his life was spent[1378]. He is said to have been a pupil of Alexander of Hales[1379] (d. 1245), and master of Duns Scotus[1380], who went to Paris in 1304. He was called doctor fundatus by later writers[1381].

His Commentaries on the Sentences were seen by Leland in the Franciscan Library, London[1382], and are now extant in the following MSS.:

[Pg 214]Richard Middleton is said by Bale, Wood, and others, to have studied at Oxford, but they produce no evidence for the statement[1383]. He was B.D. at Paris in 1283[1384], when with other doctors and bachelors he was appointed to examine the doctrines of Peter Johannis Olivi. He appears to have incepted as D.D. soon afterwards[1385], and is reckoned among the masters of Duns Scotus. Like many other famous doctors of his Order, he is said by Wadding to have written on the Immaculate Conception[1386]. According to Willot he was known at Paris as Doctor solidus et copiosus, fundatissimus et authoratus[1387]: at the Council of Basel he was referred to as Doctor profundus[1388].

Commentum super iv. Sententiarum. Inc. prologus, ‘Abscondita produxit.’

Quaestiones quodlibetales (two parts). Inc. Pars I. ‘Queritur utrum Deus sit summe simplex.’

Quodlibeta tria. (The first contains 22 questions; the second 31; the third 27.) Inc. ‘In nostra disputacione de quolibet.’

De gradibus formarum.

Quaestiones disputatae, by R. Middleton and others.

Sermo fratris Ricardi de dilatatione sermonum (?). Inc. ‘Quoniam emulatores estis.’

William de la Mare, de Mara, or Lamarensis, may have studied at Oxford[1389] before he went to Paris, where he was a disciple of Bonaventura. In 1284 he published a criticism of Thomas Aquinas, called Correctorium operum fratris Thomae[1390], which afterwards won for him the title of standard-bearer of the Anti-Thomists[1391]. This treatise, which may perhaps be still extant in an Italian library, is generally known only through the reply to it, attributed sometimes to Aegidius Romanus, but with more probability to Richard Clapwell[1392]. ‘The serious part of the work of William de Lamarre,’ says M. Charles, ‘seems directly inspired by Bacon[1393].’ He had no doubt come under Roger’s influence either at Oxford or Paris. William de Mara appears also to have written in favour of a strict observance of the Rule of St. Francis. In a dispute on the interpretation of the Rule in 1310, Friar Ubertino de Casali, one of the leaders of the ‘Spiritual’ party, quoted, in support of his views,

From this it is clear that William died before 1310.

Some of his writings are extant in MS.

Summa Fratris Gul. de Mara contra D. Thomam.

Correctorium Fratris Gul. de Mera ... secundum dicta D. Thomae de Aquino contra correctorium Fratris Joannis (?) de Crapuel Ordinis Praedicatorum—perhaps the printed Defensorium seu Correctorium.

Quaestiones de natura virtutis, by ‘Gulielmus de le Maire, ordinis Minorum.’

Sermo Fratris Guillermi de la Mare regentis in Theologia. (On St. Peter.) Inc. ‘Precurrens ascendit in arborem sycomorum.... Fratres orate ut sermo Dei currat et clarificetur.’

Expositio libri Physicorum Aristotelis; and Comment. in libros 1, 2, et 3, Sententiarum[1395].

Quaestiones tres philosophicae per Gulielmum (de Mara?) de Anglia, fratrem ordinis Minorum. Inc. ‘Est dubitacio utrum lineam componam ex punctis.’

John of Oxford, Friar Minor, was ordained priest by Peckham in 1284[1397].

Richard de Slekeburne (co. Durham), confessor of Devorguila, played an important part in the foundation of Balliol College: this[Pg 217] has already been referred to[1398]. There is no direct proof that Friar Richard was himself at Oxford. Several documents relating to him are preserved in the Balliol College Archives, and described in the Reports of the Hist. MSS. Commission[1399].

(1) A letter of Devorguila to him, in which she speaks of

and urges Friar Richard by all means in his power to promote the perpetuation of the said house, A. D. 1284.

(2) A grant by the executors of Sir John Balliol of sums to the scholars, with the consent of Devorguila and at the advice of Friar R. de Slekeburne (three deeds, 1285-1286).

(3) A confirmation by Friar Richard of another grant by Sir J. Balliol’s executors of debts due to Sir John: the confirmatory deed is dated Coventry, 1287.

William of Exeter was summoned in 1289 from Oxford by Deodatus, Warden of the Friars Minors of Exeter[1400], to assist him in choosing a new site for the convent[1401].

William of Leominster is placed among the Franciscans by Pits, but it is not certain that he belonged to this Order[1402]. He was a friar and master of Oxford in 1290; in this year his name appears as one of the masters who gave their consent on behalf of the University to the compromise, effected by the intervention of the King and his council, concerning the right of the bishop of Lincoln to confirm the Chancellor-elect[1403]. Bale states that he had seen this friar’s Collationes Sententiarum and Quaestiones Theologiae, at London, ‘in quadam officina’[1404].

John Bekinkham appears to have been an Oxford Minorite; he was one of the friars to whom the royal alms of 25 marks was paid by the exchequer in 1289 or 1290[1405].

[Pg 218]John de Clara was executor of Hugh de Cantilupe, Archdeacon of Gloucester, in 1285; he was at this time at Oxford[1406]. In 1289 or 1290 he appears, in conjunction with John Bekinkham, as receiving the royal grant of 25 marks in the name of the Oxford Convent[1407]. In 1299 he was entrusted with 10 marks out of the royal exchequer for the expenses of Hugh of Hertepol and William of Gainsborough, who were going to the General Chapter at Lyons[1408]. In 1301 he was sent with instructions to find the Provincial Minister with all speed, and received of the royal bounty 24s. 3d. for his expenses[1409].

John Russell was private chaplain to Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, in 1293. In a letter to Raymund, General Minister of the Friars Minors, dated Aug. 29, 1293[1410], the Earl thanks the Minister

Russell wrote about the same time to dominus R. de M. (Roger de Merlawe):

This John Russell was contemporary, and probably identical, with the twenty-second master of the Franciscans at Cambridge[1413].

Postilla in Cantica Canticorum. Inc. ‘Cogitanti mihi Canticum.’

Lectura super Apocalypsim. Inc. ‘Statuit septem piramides.... Accedens ad expositionem.’

De potestate imperatoris et pape.

[Pg 219]

Henry de Sutton was warden of the Grey Friars, London, in 1302[1414], and 1307, when the King (Edward I) gave him 40 marks

He procured a legacy of 2 marks annually from Henry Waleys, Mayor of London, for his convent[1416]. The evidence of his connexion with Oxford is very slight. His name occurs as the author of a sermon in a collection of sermons which were probably delivered at Oxford at the end of the thirteenth century[1417].

William Mincy, William de Newport, Roger de Barton (Cheshire), Robert de Gaddestyn or Gaddesby, John de Westburg, Robert de Mogynton (Derby), Franciscans at Oxford in 1300, were on the 26th of July in that year presented at Dorchester by Hugh of Hertepol the Provincial, and licensed by Dalderby, Bishop of Lincoln, to hear confessions, grant absolution, and enjoin penances, in the Archdeaconry of Oxford. They were not at this time, and probably never became, doctors of divinity[1418].

John de Stapleton, A. D. 1300, was similarly presented by the Provincial, but rejected by the Bishop. The Register of the Friars Minors at London says:

It is doubtful whether this refers to the same person[1419].

Adam de Corf, Peter de Todworth, Walter Bosevile, and Roger de Alnewyck, were in like manner presented by the Provincial and rejected by the Bishop, A. D. 1300. They were not at this time D.D’s. Nothing further is known of them, unless Roger de Alnewyck is to be identified with William of Alnwick, 42nd reader at Oxford[1420].

John Duns Scotus[1421] was a Franciscan at Oxford in 1300. In[Pg 220] the list of friars presented to the Bishop of Lincoln he appears as ‘Johannes Douns’[1422]; the Bishop refused to grant him license to hear confessions. Soon afterwards Duns lectured on the four books of the Sentences as B.D. at Oxford[1423]. At the end of 1304 he was called to Paris to incept as D.D. The letter of the General Minister recommending this choice is given by Wadding[1424], who however has misunderstood it. For this reason, and because it illustrates some points in the educational system of the Minorites, the letter may be quoted in full[1425].

Duns probably taught at Paris till 1307. Wadding, indeed, asserts[Pg 221] that he was sent to Cologne by the General Minister in 1305[1426]; but this is almost impossible, and the description which Wadding gives of the scene is derived from later and unhistorical tradition. The statement, however, that he was appointed Regent by the friars in the General Chapter at Toulouse in 1307 sounds more plausible[1427]; he may have been made the first Regent at Paris, or he may have been sent at this time as lector or Regent of the Franciscan schools at Cologne. At any rate there seems no reason to distrust the notice of his death which Wadding quotes from the list of friars who died at Cologne[1428].

This entry, though certainly not contemporary, was probably derived from some authentic record. Duns’ title of Doctor Subtilis, though it does not seem to have been given him in his lifetime, is of considerable antiquity. It is mentioned by Bartholomew of Pisa at the end of the fourteenth century[1429], and by the MS. Catalogue at Assisi, written in 1381[1430].

A collected edition of his works was printed at Lyons in 1639. Many of the works included in these twelve folio volumes are considered doubtful by the editors[1431].

Some few treatises not included in this edition are assigned to him.

Johannis Scoti super Apocalypsin notulae. Inc. liber: ‘Liber iste principaliter dividitur in tres partes.’ (Doubtful.)

[Ejusdem?] super S. Matthaei Evangelium notae. Inc. ‘Liber generacionis,’ &c.: ‘Sicut fluvius de loco voluptatis egrediens.’ (Doubtful.)

[Pg 222]

‘Utrum pluralitas formalitatum possit stare cum simplicitate divine essencie.’

De perfectione statuum[1432]. Inc. ‘Quod status prelatorum sc. pastorum ecclesie.’

Opusculum Doctoris Subtilis super aliquos canones Arzachel. (Doubtful.)

Tractatus Johannis Dons Scoti de lapide philosophorum. (Apocryphal.)

Robert Cowton, or de Couton (co. York), according to W. Woodford, entered the Order when young[1433]. He was at Oxford in 1300, when the Provincial asked the Bishop of Lincoln to license him, among others, to hear confessions, but Robert was among the rejected[1434]. At this time he was not a doctor. According to Bale and Pits he studied philosophy at Oxford and theology at Paris: there can be little doubt that he obtained the degree of D.D. in the latter University. His title of ‘the pleasant doctor[1435]’ is not vouched for by any early authority.

If we may draw any inference from the number of MSS. preserved, few works by any Franciscan were more in demand in England[1436] in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries than the Commentaries of Robert Cowton on the Sentences. The following MSS. contain them, or parts of them.

[Pg 223]

Malachias of Ireland is said by Wadding to have been a Franciscan and B.D. of Oxford, c. 1310. According to the same writer, he preached before Edward II, and was not afraid to rebuke the King to his face[1437].

Libellus septem peccatorum mortalium, or, Tractatus de Veneno (often wrongly ascribed to Grostete.)

Walter Brinkley or Brinkel (co. Cambridge), called by Willot ‘the Good Doctor,’ ‘the ancient Doctor and Sophist[1438],’ is said by Bale to have been a doctor of Oxford and to have flourished A. D. 1310. Bale and Pits give a list of his works, but nothing of a trustworthy nature appears to be known about him[1439].

John of Winchelsea, S.T.P. and Canon of Salisbury, a fellow of Merton in the reigns of Henry III (?) and Edward I, entered the Minorite Order in his old age at Salisbury, and died during the year of his noviciate, A. D. 1326[1440].

John Canon is said to have flourished c. 1320, and to have attended the lectures of Duns Scotus at Oxford and Paris[1441]. Wood, referring to the regestrum Oriell, says that his

[Pg 224]

Comment. in libros octo Physicorum Aristotelis. Inc. prol. ‘Venite ad me omnes qui laboratis.’ Inc. opus. ‘Utrum substancia finita.’

John Stanle, friar, was appointed to receive at the Exchequer the royal grant of 25 marks payable at Easter 1323 to the Friars Minors at Oxford[1444].

‘Philippus a Castellione Aretino’ (Castello near Arezzo) in the Tuscan province, is described by Wadding as, ‘in theologia magister insignis apud Oxonienses.’ He flourished 1316, and wrote treatises on the poverty of Christ[1445].

William of Ockham, ‘Auctor nominalium,’ ‘Doctor singularis,’ ‘Doctor invincibilis[1446],’ was born probably towards the end of the thirteenth century. Whether he was a pupil of Duns Scotus is doubtful. He studied at Oxford in the early years of the fourteenth century, and became B.D. there[1447]. After this he was called to Paris, where he incepted as D.D. Here he became acquainted with Marsiglio of Padua, over whom, according to Pope Clement VI, he exercised a powerful influence[1448]. It is probable that he was present at the famous Chapter of Perugia (1322), though he was not (as is usually asserted) Provincial of England[1449]. From the first he took a prominent part in the struggle against the Pope[1450]. He was[Pg 225] imprisoned at Avignon about the end of 1327, and a process was instituted against him in the Curia

He remained in custody for seventeen weeks, and refused to modify his opinions. It is said that a ‘rich and noble lady,’ in admiring recognition of his staunch defence of ‘Evangelical Poverty,’ gave him 70 florins[1452]. On May 25, 1328, he fled from Avignon with Cesena, the General Minister, and Bonagratia, joined the Emperor in Italy, and was excommunicated[1453]. In Feb., 1330, he accompanied Louis to Bavaria, and lived henceforth for the most part in the Franciscan Convent at Munich[1454]. His literary activity was enormous, as may be seen from the list of his works. He took a direct part in the affairs of state, being present at the Councils of Rense and Frankfurt in 1338[1455]. From this time his writings, hitherto largely theological, became more distinctly political[1456]. In spite of excommunication, he continued to support the Emperor’s cause till Louis’ death in 1347, and even later[1457]. But now few only of the rebel friars were left: Cesena died in 1342, Bonagratia in 1347; and in 1349 Ockham sent back the seal of the Order to the orthodox General Minister, and professed his desire to be reconciled to the Church[1458]. Clement VI authorized the General Minister to absolve Ockham and his associates on their confessing in set form their errors and heresies, and promising to obey the Pope and his successors. Whether Ockham subscribed the papal formula, nothing remains to show. The date of his death is uncertain; it may however be concluded that he died at Munich not before 1349[1459].

 [Pg 226]

Philosophical and Theological Works.

Commentarii in Porphyrii librum: in Aristotelis Praedicamentorum librum (or De decem generibus): in Aristotelis de Interpretatione libros duo: in libros Elenchorum.

In his Catalogue of the Bruges MSS., Haenel reads ethicorum instead of elenchorum. Ockham seems to have written no distinct work on morals, though another is attributed to him by a careless blunder. Caius College MS. 200, § 3, contains, according to Smith’s catalogue, Correcciones Occami (Occani in the old catalogue of 1697) in Oculum moralem. The MS. really reads:

In other words, it is merely a fragment of chapter viii. of the well-known Oculus moralis attributed to Grostete or Peter de Limoges. See e.g. MS. Bodl. Laud. Misc. 677, fol. 180 b, 2nd column.

Summa logices (ad Adamum): 3 parts. Inc. ‘Dudum me frater et amice.... Omnes logicae tractatores.’

Quaestiones in octo libros physicorum. Inc. ‘Valde reprehensibilis.’

Questiones Ockam super phisicam et tractatus ejusdem de futuris contingentibus.

Summulae in libros physicorum (called by Leland, De introitu scientiarum): 4 parts. Inc. prol. ‘Studiosissime saepiusque rogatus.’ Inc. Pars. I. ‘Solent ante preambula indagare sapientes ante scientie ingressum de ipsis scientiis.... Primo de ejus unitate.’

Quaestiones (or Commentarii) in quatuor libros Sententiarum. Inc. ‘Circa prologum primi libri Sententiarum quero primo utrum sit possibile intellectui viatoris.’

Ockham’s commentary on the first book of the Sentences was probably composed when he was B.D. of Oxford; it is longer than his commentaries on the other three books together, and is often found separate.

It is possible that the commentaries on the last three books exist in a fuller form in the following MSS. than in the printed editions:—

Quodlibeta septem. Inc. quodl. i. qu. i. ‘Utrum possit probari per rationem naturalem quod tantum unus sit deus: quod sic.’

De motu, loco, tempore, relatione, praedestinatione et praescientia Dei, et quodlibetum.

De successivis. Inc. ‘Videndum est de locis.’

Propositio an sit concedenda; essentia divina est quaternitas.

De sacramento altaris, and De corpore Christi: 2 treatises[1463]. Inc. i. ‘Circa conversionem panis.’ Inc. ii. ‘Stupenda super munera largitatis.’

Centiloquium theologicum. Inc. prol. ‘Anima nobis innata eo potius naturaliter appetit cognoscere suum finem, quo pre ceteris appetentibus omnibus corruptibilibus creatis ratione ditata ad ymaginem et similitudinem dei celsius eminentiusque figuratur.’

[Pg 229]

Quaestiones Ocham in terminabiles Alberti de Saxonia.

Sermones Occham, by William or Nicholas of Ockham?

Notes or disputations on theology and philosophy, to which the name ‘Okam’ is appended.

Gul. Ocham quedam scripta.

Political Works.

The dates are taken for the most part from Riezler.

Opus nonaginta dierum (written between 1330 and 1333). Inc. prol. ‘Doctoris gentium et Magistri Beati Pauli.’

Epistola ad Fratres Minores in Capitulo apud Assisium congregatos, A. D. 1334. Inc. ‘Religiosis viris fratribus minoribus universis A. D. Millesimo CCCXXXIIII. in festo Petri apud Assisium congregatis frater Guilhelmus de Ocham fidem defensare.’

This has not been printed and is not mentioned by Riezler; it is distinct from the letter of Cesena to the Friars Minors about to assemble in Chapter at Perpignan or Avignon, dated April 25, 1331 (printed Lyons 1495), and the letter of Cesena to all the Friars Minors, dated Jan. 24, 1331 (printed ibid.; Goldast, II. 1238, and Riezler, 248, give 1333 as the date of this last letter).

Dialogus[1464] inter magistrum et discipulum de Imperatorum et Pontificum Potestate; 3 parts:

i. De fautoribus haereticorum libri septem (written A. D. 1342 or 1343). Inc. ‘In omnibus rebus curiosus existis.’

ii. De dogmatibus Johannis XXII, tractatus duo (A. D. 1333 or 1334). Inc. ‘Verba oris ejus iniquitas et dolus.’

[Pg 230]iii. De gestis circa fidem altercantium, (A. D. 1342-3). (1) De potestate papae et cleri; 4 books. (2) De potestate et juribus Romani imperii; 3 books. Inc. ‘Discip. Salomonis utcumque sequendo vestigia.’