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]

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 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 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.

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.

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).

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.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

CORRIGENDA.

[P. 6], n. 5, for tempora, read temporalem.

[P. 33]. There was no house of Grey Friars at Evesham. Simon de Montfort was buried by the monks of Evesham (see Rishanger). The Miracula Symonis de Montfort, however, bears evident traces of Franciscan influence.

[P. 49], n. 3, for Church, Quarterly Review, read Church Quarterly Review.

[P. 54], l. 11, for because, read became.

[P. 56], n. 5 for quos, read quas.

THE GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD.

PART I.

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

CHAPTER I.

EARLY YEARS.

Arrival of the Franciscans at Oxford.—Their early Poverty, and Cheerfulness.—Oxford Friars as Peacemakers, and Crusaders.—Relations to the University, and to the first Colleges.—Their strict observance of the Rule.

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), 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

‘there came a certain poor man, humble and despised, in the habit of those poor friars, and he cried with a loud voice: “O most impartial Judge, the blood of my brethren, which hath been shed this night, crieth unto Thee. The guardians of this place have refused them meat and lodging, although they have left all for Thy sake, and were now coming here to seek those souls which Thou hast redeemed with Thy blood; they would not, in fact, have refused as much to jesters and mummers.”... Then the Judge commanded them to be hanged on the elm that stood in that cloister.’

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 ate in their refectory, and slept in their dormitory, like conventuals for eight days[6].’

They then hired a house in the parish of St. Ebbe from Robert le Mercer[7]. Alms sufficient for the purpose were probably already 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

‘within a year conferred the land and house on the community of the town for the use of the Friars Minors.’

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

‘so low that the height of the walls did not much exceed the height of a man[15].’

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].’

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

‘picked their way along the rugged path over the frozen mud and rigid snow, whilst the blood lay in the track of their naked feet, without their being conscious of it[21].’

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:—

‘Wherefore,’ writes Adam to the Archdeacon, ‘the bearer of these presents has at the instance of the brethren taken the said money, just as it was, sealed with your seal, to your lordship, to dispose of according to your pleasure[24].’

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 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

‘give to the Friars Minors of Oxford one cask of wine of the six casks which he took into the king’s hand of the wine of those who lately killed a clerk in the town of Oxford[31].’

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

‘give of the ferm of their town to Friar Roger, King’s Almoner, on Wednesday the morrow of the feast of St. Lucy the Virgin, ten marks, to feed a thousand paupers and the Friars Preachers and Minors of Oxford, for the soul of the Lady Empress sister of the King, on the day of her anniversary[33].’

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].

‘Yet,’ continues Eccleston[35], ‘the brethren were so full of fun among themselves, that a mute could hardly refrain from laughter at the sight. So when the young friars of Oxford laughed too frequently, it was enjoined on one that as often as he laughed he should be punished. Now it happened that, when he had received no punishments in one day, and yet could not restrain himself from laughing, he had a vision one night, that the whole convent stood as usual in the choir, and the friars were beginning to laugh as usual, and behold the crucifix which stood at the door of the choir turned towards them as though alive, and said: “They are the sons of Corah who in the hour of chanting laugh and sleep.”... On hearing this dream, the friars were frightened and behaved without very noticeable laughter[36].’

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

‘commanded a melancholy friar to drink a cup full of the best wine as a penance, and when he had drunk it up, though most unwillingly, he said to him, “Dear brother, if you often performed a penance like that, you would have a better ordered conscience[40].”’

The friars lovingly treasured up the great bishop’s puns and jokes and 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

‘eat of all manner of meats which be set before them[44],’

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; 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 above-mentioned friar,’ continues the chronicler, ‘who by his example provoked very many to martyrdom, had been no small space of time warden of the Oxford Convent[56].’

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, 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

‘with the consent of Devorguila and at the advice of Friar Richard de Slikeburne[69].’

Nor was the connexion merely a transitory one. The statutes of 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

‘by Masters Robert of Leicester, of the Order of Friars Minors, S.T.P., and Nicholas de Tyngewick, M.D. and S.T.B., then Magistri Extranei of the said House[73].’

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

‘Richard Roderham, S.T.P., and John Feckyngtone of the order of Minorites in Oxford, Rectors of Balliol College.’

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 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.

‘Having marked some articles, the said friars sent them to the General, in a schedule without a seal, beseeching him, by the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ, to let the Rule stand, as it was handed down by St. Francis, at the dictation of the Holy Spirit[78].’

CHAPTER II.

PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS.

First Settlement inside the City Wall.—Acquisition of the houses of W. de Wileford (1229) and Robert Oen (1236).—Increase of the area in 1244-1245.—Grants from the King, Thomas Valeynes, and others.—Island in the Thames, 1245.—Messuage of Laurence Wych, 1247.—Friars of the Penitence of Jesus Christ.—Their property in Oxford granted to the Minorites by Clement V, and by Edward II, 1310.—Grants from various persons, 1310.—Richard Cary and John Culvard, 1319.—Walter Morton, 1321.—To what classes did the donors belong?

Absence of information about the buildings at the Grey Friars.—Original houses and chapel.—School built by Agnellus.—The stricter friars oppose the tendency to build, without success.—Building of the new church, 1246, &c.—Its site and appearance.—William of Worcester’s description of it.—Richard Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall, buried there, 1272.—Other tombs in the church, especially that of Agnellus.—Grave of Roger Bacon.—Cloisters, Chapter House, Refectory, and other conventual buildings.—Conduit and Gates.

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,

‘without the towne wall, and about a stone’s cast from their first hired house[81].’

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,

‘having been a free tenant of the prior and brethren of St. John of Jerusalem in England in the aforesaid place,’

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 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

‘preferred that the friars should have ample areas and should cultivate them, that they might have the fruits of the earth at home, rather than beg them from others[90].’

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,

‘for the greater quiet and security of their habitation, to inclose the street which extends under the wall of Oxford, from the gate which is called Watergate[93] in the parish of St. Ebbe, up to the postern in the same wall towards the Castle; so that a crenellated wall like the rest of the wall of the same town be made round the foresaid dwelling, beginning from the west side of Watergate, and reaching southwards as far as the bank of the Thames, and extending along the bank westwards as far as the fee of the Abbat of Bec in the parish of St. Bodhoc, and then turning again northwards till it joins the old wall of the foresaid borough on the east side of the small postern;’

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,

‘of the gift of Agnes widow of Guydo[95], which the said Agnes had by descent from her predecessors, and they pay thence to Walter Goldsmith one pound of cummin[96].’

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 his wife, received one messuage outside the North Gate, together with a building then held by Hugh Marshall,

‘which same messuage and building were formerly held by Benedictus le Mercer father of the foresaid Symon.’

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

‘to the increase of the area in which the Friars Minors dwelling at Oxford are lodged in pure and perpetual alms free and quit of all secular service and exaction for ever;’

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,

‘our island in the Thames, which we have bought from Henry son of Henry Simeon,’

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 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,

‘imposed on Henry son of Henry Simeonis because he was implicated in[104] the murder of a scholar of Oxford, twenty-five marcs, for twenty-five marcs which we owed to Henry Simeonis his father for an island in the Thames at Oxford which we have bought from him, and which said marcs he begged should be reckoned to his son in the aforesaid fine.’

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:

‘and the Sheriff of Oxfordshire was commanded to receive the messuage in place of the King for the use of the said friars.’

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]

‘the cemetery and the houses standing in the same and belonging to the said church,’

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].

‘In a petition exhibited to us on your part,’ runs the document, ‘it is contained that owing to the narrowness of your place at Oxford, you and other friars, there flocking together to the University from divers parts of the world in great multitude, do endure manifold wants and various inconveniences. Since therefore the place of the Friars of the Penitence of Jesus Christ of the same place of Oxford adjoining your place, is shortly, as is believed, to be relinquished by the said Friars, to remain at the disposal of the Apostolic Seat, according to the tenor of the Constitution published by Pope Gregory X, our predecessor, in the Council of Lyons, it is humbly prayed us, that we deign to concede to you that place for the enlargement of your place aforesaid.’

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 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 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

‘the place which the Friars of the Penitence bought of Walter Aurifaber, and they pay thence to the Prior of Steventon 2s.[122]’

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,

‘at all times when it shall be necessary, to have free entry and egress thence to restore, repair and defend the wall of the said town.’

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, 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

‘thirty beams in the royal forest of Savernak for the fabric of their chapel which they are having built at Oxford,’

adding that

‘if any one in the same bailiwick shall wish to give them timber, the bailiff shall permit them without hindrance to carry through the forest free of toll oaks to the number of thirty[130].’

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 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,

‘if the friars were not damned for their excess in building, they would at any rate be severely punished[137].’

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

‘for flesh and blood, for mud and walls, for wood and stone, for any kind of worldly gain[138].’

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),

‘the Sheriff of Berkshire was ordered to give to the Friars Minors of Oxford for the works of their houses sixty shillings instead of six oaks which the King gave them before[141];’

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 process of erection in February, 1246[143], and February, 1248[144]. At the latter date the friars are again permitted to

‘enclose the street which extends under the wall of Oxford from the Watergate ... to the small postern in the wall near the Castle.... We grant also that the north side of the chapel built and to be built in the aforesaid street may supply the interruption of the wall as far as it is to reach, the other breaches in the wall being fully repaired as before, except the small postern in the wall, through which the said friars can go and return from the new place where they now live, to the former place in which they used to live.’

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, represented the tower of the Grey Friars[149]. William of Worcester has left a somewhat puzzling[150] description of the church in 1480[151].

‘The length of the choir of the church of St. Francis at Oxford contains 68 steps. The length from the door (valva) of the choir to the west window contains 90 steps; so in the whole length it contains 150 (?) steps. The width of the nave of the said church on the east (ab orienti parte) contains with the aisle 28 steps. The length of the nave from the south side to the north door contains 40 steps only, and there are ten chapels in the said north nave of the church. The width of the north nave of the church contains 20 steps. The width of each chapel contains 6 steps, and so the width of the whole nave of the church with the ten chapels contains 26 steps. And each chapel contains in length 6 steps. And each glass window of the ten chapels contains three dayes (or lights) glazed.’

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 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]

‘under a sumptuous pyramid of admirable workmanship[158].’

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

‘at the time of his death (1396) he altered his will in that part in which he bequeathed his body to be buried in the chancel of the church of the Friars Minors at Oxford, and willed and also bequeathed his body to be buried in the Conventual Church of Westminster where our lord the King shall dispose[163].’

William Lord Lovell, by a will dated 18 March, 1454/5, made provision

‘to be buried at the Grayfreris of Oxenford in suche place as I have appoynted[164].’

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,

‘in the midst between the two altars beneath the highest cross in the body of the church[165].’

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

‘in the Conventual Church of the Friars Minors of Oxford before the image of the blessed Mary the Virgin of Pity[167].’

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

‘to be buried within the Graye ffreres in Oxford before the awter where the first masse is daily vsed to be saide[168].’

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,

‘they found the little leaden box in which it lay, together with the grave, full of the purest oil, but the body itself with the vestments uncorrupted and smelling most sweetly[170].’

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].

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

‘Capped Friars, that beene called Maisters of Diuinitie, haue there chamber and service as Lords or Kings[179].’

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].

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:’

‘And I will answer to the General, that I did not enter the Order to build walls[186].’

CHAPTER III.

FRANCISCAN SCHOOLS AT OXFORD.

Learning necessary to the friars.—The first readers to the Franciscans at Oxford.—Nature of the office of lector; Grostete and Adam Marsh.—The lector and his socius.—Later lectors were ordinary Regent Masters.—Appointment to the lectureship.—Special regulations concerning the lectors.—System of instruction recommended by Grostete.—Lectures by friars.—Controversy with the University about theological degrees in 1253.—Controversy between the University and Dominicans, and its results.—Study of philosophy (Arts) before theology insisted on by the University.—Roger Bacon on the necessity of a preliminary training for friars.—Extortion of graces by external influence: ‘wax-doctors.’—Career of a student Minorite.—On the numbers of friars sent to Oxford.—Course of study before ‘opposition.’—‘Opposition’ and ‘Responsion.’—The degree of B.D.—Exercises before inception.—The degree of D.D.: the licence.—Vesperies.—Inception.—Questions disputed on these occasions in the thirteenth century.—How far the statutable requirements as to the period of study were a reality.—Expenses at inception.—Necessary Regency.—Conditions on which dispensations were granted.—Maintenance of Franciscan students at the University.—What proportion took degrees.—Relative numbers of the various religious Orders at Oxford.

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

‘Tantum habet homo de scientia quantum operatur,’ he said, ‘et religiosus tantum est bonus orator quantum operatur[187].’

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.

‘They were so fervent,’ Eccleston tells us, ‘in hearing the divine law and in scholastic exercises, that they hesitated not to go every day to the schools of theology, however distant, barefoot in bitter cold and deep mud[189].’

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:

‘but afterwards,’ adds Bartholomew of Pisa[191], ‘he had reason for regret, when he saw the friars bestowing their time on frivolities and neglecting needful things; for one day when he wished to see what proficiency they were making, he entered the schools whilst a disputation was going on, and hearing them wrangling and questioning, Utrum sit Deus, he cried: “Woe is me, woe is me! Simple brothers enter Heaven, and learned brothers dispute whether there is a God at all!” Then he sent 10l. sterling to the Court to buy the Decretals, that the friars might study them and give over frivolities.’

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,

‘after he had lectured laudably at the Friars’ in the same place, was appointed (in 1247) to the bishopric of St. David’s in Wales[199].’

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,

‘because it was in his native country, Wales, and he desired to console his wretched fellow countrymen by his presence, advice, and help[207].’

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

‘that he had three years ago retired from the office of teaching in their University[209].’

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.

‘I return your lordship,’ writes Adam to Grostete[213], ‘the breviate which you wrote, “Of the rule of a kingdom and a tyranny,” as you sent it, sealed with the seal of the Earl of Leicester;’

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 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.’

‘I see,’ he continues, ‘that any friar who is associated with me to help me in my various[221] and constant toil, will have to subordinate his ecclesiastical labours and apply himself continually to supplying my defects, and directing my goings, and supporting my burdens, though this might sometimes produce in him virtue and industry and endurance. Far be from me therefore such impious tyranny, as that I should be willing to see the great gifts and spiritual progress in the said friar stunted or retarded or thwarted by any consideration of private convenience; especially as I can through the Saviour’s pity, be provided, as I have heretofore been by your grace, with a competent companion without injury to the general welfare. I have also reason to think that Friar A., however great be his willingness and energy, will be unable without bodily suffering and mental disquietude to continue permanently with me, unless the stringent rules are relaxed in his favour (nisi quatenus urgentia mitigat obedientiae salutaris diurnos aestus et vigilias nocturnas).

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

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

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

The position of 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 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.),

‘unless he had first lectured on the four books of the Sentences with the writings of the approved doctors in other studia which are in the same Order called Generalia,’

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

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

However, the Franciscans at Oxford never obtained the right 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 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

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

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

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

The rules of the two Orders forbade their members to take a degree in Arts[243]. The customs of the University, on the other hand, required 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,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

but the Franciscans took no active part in the matter, and the details of the struggle belong to the history of the Black Friars. The other 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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