►w
*4
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
A CHRONICLE OF THE
ARCHBISHOPS OF CANTERBURY
A CHRONICLE OF
THE ARCHBISHOPS OF
CANTERBURY
BY
A. E. McKILLIAM, M.A.
author or "chronicles of the popes," "makers of history,'
" THE highways of the world," etc., etc.
LONDON
JAMES CLARKE & CO., 13 & 14, FLEET STREET
1913
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2007 with funding from
Microsoft Corporation
http://www.archive.org/details/chronicleofarchbOOmckiiala
College
Library
5ft S
IDebicateb
BY SPECIAL PERMISSION TO
HIS GRACE THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
2072406
Prefatory Note
The prominent part played in English history by the arch-
bishops of Canterbury is a striking proof of the dominating
influence exercised by the Christian Church in the making of
our state and nation. Throughout many centuries few political
or social crises occurred in our history in which the ruling
successor of St. Augustine did not take a leading part. Though
in this long line of illustrious prelates stretching from the
sixth to the twentieth century many were justly accused of
being led through ambition to neglect ecclesiastical for state
affairs, yet of few can it be said that they died faithless at
heart to the Church they served.
Within the scope of this volume it is of course impossible
to treat the subject in detail, and no attempt has been made
to write a history of the Church of England. But as no
work in one volume has hitherto appeared giving a simple
chronicle of the chief facts and events connected with the
lives of all the primates of Canterbury from St. Augustine
to Dr. Randall Davidson it is hoped that the present com-
pilation may prove of value both to the general reader and
to the student of history.
Dr. Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury, after
reading some of the proof sheets writes : — " I think the book
is likely to be of genuine value, and I shall welcome its appear-
ance. Obviously the more important part of it will be that
which contains the lives of those Archbishops who have not
had Dean Hook as their biographer — i.e., from the Restoration
to the present day. There is no handy volume containing
these lives in any adequate form."
The author desires to acknowledge valuable help rendered
during the preparation of the work by the Rev. Claude
Jenkins, Librarian Lambeth Palace, who very kindly
suggested many sources whence information was derived
concerning the lives of individual archbishops.
A. E. McK.
Contents
PAGI
i. Augustine .... 9
2. Laurentius - - - - 17
3. Meixitus - - - - 21
4. Justus - - - - 25
5. Honorius 28
6. Deusdedit - - - - 32
7. Theodore 36
8. Brihtwald 43
9. Tatwin - - - - 47
io. nothelm .... 49
ii. cuthbert 52
12. Bregwin 56
13. Jaenbert (or Lambert) 59
14. Ethelheard - - - - 63
15. WULFRED 67
16. Feologeld (or Theologild) - - - 71
17. Ceolnoth - - - - 72
18. Ethelred (or Athelred) - - - 75
19. Plegmund 78
20. Athelm - - - - 81
21. wulfhelm 82
22. ODO .... 84
23. DUNSTAN 89
24. Ethelgar (or Algar) ... 101
25. Sigeric (or Siric) ... 103
26. Elfric (or Alfric) ... 105
27. Elphege (or Alpheah) - - - 108
28. Lyving (or Elstan) - - - 114
29. Ethelnoth (or Egelnodus) - - - 116
30. Eadsige (or Eadsine) - - - 119
31. Robert (or Champart) - - - 121
32. Stigand - - - - 124
Contents
PAGE
33. Lanfranc - - - - 130
34. Anselm - - - - 139
35. Ralph D'Escures - - . ^9
36. William de Corbeil - - - 155
37. Theobald - - - . j$g
38. Thomas A Becket - - . 165
39. Richard .... x^
40. Baldwin - - - - jgj
41. Hubert Walter - - - 186
42. Stephen Langton - - - 192
43. Richard Wethershed (or Grant) - - 198
44. Edmund Rich of Abingdon - - 201
45. Boniface of Savoy - - - 206
46. Robert Kilwardby - - - 211
47. John Peckham - - - - 214
48. Robert Winchelsea - - - 218
49. Walter Reynolds - - - 223
50. Simon Meopham (or Mepeham) - - 227
51. John De Stratford - - - 231
52. Thomas Bradwardine - - - 235
53. Simon Islip .... 238
54. Simon Langham ... 242
55. William Whittlesey - - - 245
56. Simon Sudbury ... 247
57. William Courtenay - - - 251
58. Thomas Arundel - - - 255
59. Roger Walden ... 26o
6b. Henry Chicele ... 263
61. John Stafford ... 268
62. John Kemp .... 272
63. Thomas Bourchier - - - 276
64. John Morton - - - 281
65. Henry Deane - - - - 286
66. William Warham ... 290
67. Thomas Cranmer ... 295
68. Reginald Pole .... 306
69. Matthew Parker - - - 314
70. Edmund Grind al - - - 320
Contents
PAGE
71. John Whitgift .... 324
72. Richard Bancroft - - - 330
73. George Abbot - 333
74. William Laud - - - 339
75. William Juxon ... 347
76. Gilbert Sheldon - - - 351
77. William Sancroft - - - 355
78. John Tillotson - - - 361
79. Thomas Tenison ... 365
80. William Wake .... 369
81. John Potter .... 373
82. Thomas Herring ... 3^5
83. Matthew Hutton ... ^g
84. Thomas Secker - - - 381
85. Frederick Cornwallis - - - 386
86. John Moore .... 389
87. Charles Manners-Sutton - - 392
88. William Howley - - - 395
89. John Bird Sumner ... ^qq
90. Charles Thomas Longley - - 404
91. Archibald Campbell Tait - - 408
92. Edward White Benson - - - 418
93. Frederick Temple ... ^27
94. Randall Thomas Davidson - - 437
A CHRONICLE OF THE
ARCHBISHOPS OF CANTERBURY
i.— AUGUSTINE, d. 604 (?) S.
Ethelbert, King of Kent, 560 to 616.
Ethelfrith, King of Northumbria, 593 to 617.
Sabert, King of Essex, c. 603 to 616.
Concerning the early life of the prelate to whom belongs
the proud title of first Archbishop of Canterbury history
reveals nothing. All we know is that when Pope Gregory
the Great determined to carry out a long cherished dream,
and send Christian missionaries to Saxon England, he chose
as the leader of the little band his friend Augustine, probably
a Roman, prior of the monastery of St. Andrew, on the
Cselian Hill.
Events had already prepared the way for the success of
this missionary enterprise. Though Christianity had been
established in Britain during the Roman occupation, the fierce
Saxon tribes, on taking possession, had restored paganism
throughout the country. The Christian Britons who escaped
slaughter, stripped of everything save their faith, had taken
refuge in the distant regions of the west. There, for more
than a century and a half, they were cut off from all com-
munication with the Church in Rome.
Meantime, in Rome itself, the Christian Church had
remained unshaken, amidst the general wreck involved in
the downfall of the great Roman Empire. In 590 the hold
of Christianity on Rome was strengthened still further by
the elevation to the papal chair of Gregory I., the greatest
statesman of his age.
The story is well known of how, some years before his
elevation to the papacy, Gregory had been moved to com-
passion by the sight of English children in the slave-market
9
2
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
in Rome, and had resolved that to so noble a race Christianity
must be preached. But it is scarcely probable that the
momentary enthusiasm roused by such a sight was Gregory's
sole motive for engaging in this work. It is more in
keeping with his character to suppose that the duty of organ-
izing a mission to the English had long occupied his thoughts.
While abbot of the monastery of St. Andrew, Gregory had
determined to carry the Gospel message to Britain himself.
Having obtained permission from Pope Pelagius II., he set
out on his journey northward. But so great was the devotion
of the Roman people to the noble abbot that they rose in
revolt, and forced the pope to send hasty messengers after
him to bring him back.1
Gregory did not, however, abandon his purpose to convert
Britain. One of his first acts after his elevation to the papal
chair was to employ an agent in France to buy English youths
sold as slaves between the ages of seventeen and eighteen.
These were to be brought to Rome and trained as missionaries
to the English.2 But before this scheme could be carried out
he received news which determined him to adopt a more
direct course.
The exact date is uncertain, but probably about twenty
years before Gregory became pope, Ethelbert, the noble and
liberal-minded king of Kent, had been united in marriage to
a Christian princess, Bertha, daughter of Charibert, King of
Paris. In the marriage treaty it had been stipulated that
Bertha should be permitted the free exercise of the Christian
religion, and she accordingly brought with her from Gaul,
one Luidhard, a French bishop. Luidhard had retired from
the bishopric of Senlis, and was probably well advanced in
years at the time of his arrival in this country, for he died
in the same year as Augustine landed in England. Though
he appears to have laboured with great zeal and considerable
success, his single efforts were insufficient to overtake the
vast work that lay waiting to be done.
Meantime Ethelbert had been acknowledged as Bretwalda
by the Saxons of Middlesex and Essex, as well as by the men
1 Vita S. Gregorii Magni, Auctore Johanne Diacono, I. 23.
2 Greg. Ep. VI. 7, in Councils and Documents relating to Great Britain
and Ireland. Haddan and Stubbs.
10
Augustine
of East Anglia, and part of Mercia ; and his overlordship
extended as far north as the Humber.3 His political impor-
tance began to be felt by the Frankish princes on the other side
of the Channel, while intercourse with Gaul and acquaintance
with Roman customs had by this time exercised a civilizing
influence on the pagan Saxons. Luidhard did not fail to
perceive that many of the Saxons were disposed to receive
Christianity, and he accordingly despatched a messenger to
Rome, begging the pope to send missionaries to England.
According to some accounts it was in response to this appeal
that in the year 596, Gregory despatched Augustine, with a
band of forty monks, to carry the message of Christianity to
the English.
In the month of June, the little company set out on
their long journey, furnished with letters from Gregory to
the bishops and Christian princes of the countries through
which they were to pass. They were also instructed to
provide themselves with interpreters before landing in Britain.4
The missionaries crossed the Alps and reached Aix in
Provence. Here the difficulties of the journey or tales of the
uncouth islanders among whom they were going seems to have
chilled their enthusiasm. Some of the number proposed that
they should turn back. In face of this difficulty, Augustine
apparently showed himself lacking in moral courage and
strength of purpose. Instead of dispelling their fears and
boldly continuing his way, he offered to return to Rome to
beg Pope Gregory that they might be excused from
undertaking so difficult an enterprise.
So Augustine returned to Rome, and laid the matter before
Gregory, explaining the difficulties and dangers of the way.
But the famous pope, whose whole life had been spent in
meeting difficulties and overcoming them, refused to sym-
pathize with such fears. He ordered Augustine to return
without delay to his faint-hearted brethren, bearing with
him a letter in which the pope commended them to the pro-
tection of God and exhorted them to go forward to the work
they had undertaken, fearing nothing.
This letter is dated July 23, 50.6.5 Augustine must have
3 Bede's Eccles. Hist., Bk. L, Chap. 25. 4 Ibid.
5 Ibid I. 23.
II
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
reached Gaul on his return journey some time in August.
The missionaries now continued their way, no further delays
being recorded, and landed in the Isle of Thanet, in Kent, some
time in the autumn. Soon after their arrival, Augustine sent
messengers to King Ethelbert to ask for his protection, and
also to beg for liberty to preach Christianity in Kent. The
king replied by sending orders that the monks should be
kindly treated, and supplied with all they required by the
inhabitants of the district, until he could come in person to
hold an interview with them. A few days later, Ethelbert,
probably accompanied by Queen Bertha, came from
Canterbury, his capital, which was only about twelve miles
distant. Augustine and the monks advanced to meet him in
procession, bearing a silver cross, and a picture of the cruci-
fixion— crucifixes had not yet been invented — and chanting
a litany. The interview took place in the open air, for the king
feared that the missionaries might otherwise practise magic arts
on him.6
Augustine addressed the king by means of an interpreter,
explaining the purpose of their coming and the message they
brought. When he had ended, Ethelbert replied in a manner
which showed his good sense and tolerance : " Your words
and promises are very fair, but they are new to us and of un-
certain meaning. I cannot approve of them so far as to
forsake what I have so long followed, with the whole English
nation. But because you are come from far into my kingdom,
and as I conceive are desirous to impart to us those things
which you believe to be true and most beneficial, we will not
molest you, but give you favourable entertainment and take
care to supply you with your necessary sustenance, nor do we
forbid you to preach, and gain as many as you can to your
religion."7
With the king's permission the monks proceeded to Canter-
bury, which they entered in procession chanting the litany.
They were allowed to take possession of St. Martin's Church,
on the east side of the city, a Roman or British building which
had been assigned to Queen Bertha, and reconsecrated by
Luidhard.8 The self-denying and pious life led by the
Italian monks rapidly influenced the people of Kent and
0 Bede's Eccles. Hist., I. 25. » Ibid. 8 Ibid.
12
Augustine
disposed them to receive the Christian message. When it
became clear to King Ethelbert that his subjects were not
likely to oppose Christianity, he decided to declare himself
a Christian, and was baptized on June 2, 597, this being the
festival of Whitsuntide. Though he made no attempt to force
Christianity on his subjects, a large number of them followed
his example, and on the following Christmas Day, no less
than 10,000 persons are said to have been baptized.
This large increase in the number of converts neces-
sitated more church accommodation, and more clergy.
On the site of the old Roman basilica Augustine founded
the Benedictine monastery of Christ Church. The church
of this monastery was either burnt, or much damaged
by the Danes in 1011 (vide Elphege), but was rebuilt
by Cnut. It was destroyed by fire in 1067, and the present
cathedral of Canterbury built on the same site was begun by
Lanfranc in 1070. The other foundation of Augustine was
the monastery of SS. Peter and Paul, built outside the city.9
To this a cemetery was attached.10 It came to be known later
as the monastery of St. Augustine. On its site now stands the
missionary college of St. Augustine. King Ethelbert gave
up his own palace at Canterbury, to be a residence for the
missionaries, and retired to Reculver," at the north-west end
of the Isle of Thanet.
Augustine applied to the pope for more clergy, and in 601,
other missionaries arrived from Rome. They brought with
them valuable gifts, including altar-cloths, vestments, relics
and books. Meantime, Augustine, acting under directions
received from Pope Gregory, had journeyed to the South of
France, and had been ordained " bishop of the English " by
Virgilius, Archbishop of Aries, the only French metropolitan
then in direct communication with the see of Rome. After
his consecration, Augustine received from Gregory the Roman
pallium, which was brought with other gifts by the new
missionaries from Rome.
9 Bede's Eccles. Hist., I. 33.
10 Vita Augustini byGosselin in Anglia Sacra, chapter 15, Wharton's
edition.
" Dugdale's Monasticon Anglicanum, Vol. I., p. 454, note ; cf.
Stanley's Memorials of Canterbury, pp. 38-42.
13
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Though Augustine might have rested content with the con-
version of the Kentish kingdom, the pope had greater projects
in view. From his letters to Augustine, we learn that he had
prepared a scheme of complete ecclesiastical organization for
England, under twenty-four bishops, twelve of whom were to
be subject to Augustine.13 London and not Canterbury was to
be the chief diocese, and Gregory intended to create another
archiepiscopal see at York. But the great pope did not live
to carry out these projects.
In 604, a see to which Justus was consecrated the first bishop
was established at Rochester.13 Shortly before this, news had
reached Augustine that Sabert, King of Essex, the nephew of
Ethelbert, desired that the Christian faith might be preached
in his kingdom. Missionaries were accordingly sent thither,
and one of them named Mellitus was afterwards consecrated
by Augustine to the see of London.14
It was the earnest desire of Augustine and Ethelbert that
the Kentish Church should unite with the Church already
existing in Britain in order to spread Christianity through-
out the country. Augustine accordingly journeyed across
Wessex to the borders of the Hwiccas, and summoned the
Welsh clergy to a conference at a place afterwards called
Augustine's Oak, which is generally identified with Aust in
Gloucestershire.15
The usage of the British Church differed from the Roman
in the time of keeping Easter, in the ritual used at baptism,
and in certain other points. Augustine demanded that
the Welsh bishops should conform to the Roman usage, but he
appears to have shown little capacity for conciliating them.
At the first meeting he called on them to unite with him for
the conversion of the heathen, but as a condition of the union,
he insisted that they should keep Easter at the same time as
the Roman Church. A long discussion took place, but the
British bishops were disinclined to give way to Augustine. At
length, to put an end to the tedious contention, Augustine
is said to have proposed that some infirm person be brought,
and that the faith and practice of those by whose prayers
he was healed should be looked upon as acceptable to God.
" Bede's Eccles. Hist., I. 29. 1 Ibid, Bk. II., 3.
M Ibid. '5 Ibid, II. 2, and note.
14
Augustine
To this the British bishops consented, though with some
reluctance.
A blind man, an Anglo-Saxon, was accordingly brought
and having been presented to the British priests, found no
benefit or cure from their ministry. Augustine then prayed
earnestly to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ that sight
might be restored to the blind man, so that " by the corporal
enlightening of one man the light of spiritual grace might be
kindled in the hearts of many of the faithful." Immediately,
the blind man received sight, and the truth of Augustine's
doctrine was acknowledged.16
It is highly probable that this story is a fabrication, derived
from some monkish tradition. Though the British bishops
are said to have been much impressed by the miracle, they
still declined to depart from their own customs without the
consent of their people. It was therefore, agreed to hold a
second conference at which more of their number should be
present.
The second synod was attended by seven British bishops and
many learned monks from the celebrated monastery of Bangor
Iscoed in Flintshire, over which Abbot Dinooth is said to have
presided at that time. Before repairing to the place of meeting
the British bishops went to consult a wise and holy hermit
regarding their plan of action. They inquired whether he
would advise them to forsake their ancient traditions in order
to obey Augustine. The hermit replied that if Augustine was a
man of God, it would be wise to follow him. " How shall we
know if he be a man of God ? " they asked. The hermit
replied, that a man of God would be known by his meekness
and lowliness of heart, and that they would be wise to reject
the words of one who was proud and haughty. The British
bishops accordingly agreed that they would permit Augustine
to arrive first at the place of meeting. If he rose up to receive
them they would agree to his proposals and accept him as their
leader. But if he remained seated, they would reject him.
When they approached Augustine was seated in a chair,
where he calmly remained throughout the meeting. The
bishops, justly indignant, refused to yield to him in any way,
believing that if he could thus treat them while they were
,6 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 2.
15
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
his equals, he would show them still less respect if he were
acknowledged as their superior.17 Augustine denounced their
disobedience, and after warning them that they might expect
to be visited by the Divine wrath, he returned in great
indignation to Canterbury.
In his letters to Pope Gregory, Augustine addressed a
number of queries concerning doubtful points of Church
discipline. The questions raised represent him as a pains-
taking official, who found difficulty in adapting his principles
to his altered circumstances, rather than as a prelate of ability.
The wise and sympathetic replies sent by Pope Gregory to the
these queries are quoted at great length by Bede.18
The last of Augustine's recorded acts is his ordination of the
two bishops already mentioned, Justus and Mellitus. The
exact date of his death has been disputed by recent writers,
but it is generally given as May 26, 604, a few months after
that of his distinguished friend and patron, Pope Gregory the
Great. He was buried in the cemetery attached to the
Church of SS. Peter and Paul. His festival occurs in the
Roman calendar on May 28.
Though his history shows him to have been in no way
remarkable, and to have been singularly wanting in tact and
conciliatory power, he was much beloved and reverenced by his
contemporaries, and his memory was cherished long after his
death.
In Bede's time, the following epitaph existed on the tomb
of St. Augustine in the church of SS. Peter and Paul, Canter-
bury :
Hie requiescit dominus Augustinus Dorovernensis Archi-
episcopus primus, qui olinVhuc a beato Gregorio Romanae urbis
pontifice directus, et a Deo operatione miraculorum suffultus,
^Ddilberctum regem ac gentem illius ab idolorum cultu ad
Christi fidem perduxit, et completis in pace diebus officii sui,
defunctus est, septimo Kalendas Junias, eodem rege regnante.19
«? Cf. Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 3. l8 I. 27.
«» Ibid., II. 3-
16
2.— LAURENTIUS, 604 to 619.
Ethelbert, King of Kent, to 616.
Eadbald, King of Kent, 616 to 640.
A few months before his death, Augustine had ordained as
his successor one out of the faithful band who had accom-
panied him from Rome. This step had been doubtless taken
in order to prevent the danger which would have arisen to the
newly founded Church through the jealousies involved in a
new election. His choice had fallen on Lauren tius who, in one
of Pope Gregory's epistles to the bishops of Gaul, is described
as a presbyter, in contrast to a certain Peter, who is described
as a monk.1 That he occupied a position of some prominence
among the missionaries is proved by his having been chosen
by Augustine in 601 to carry important letters to Rome.
On his return, he brought with him a band of new missionaries.
The choice of Augustine seems to have been fully approved
by his colleagues, and on his death, Laurentius was immedi-
ately consecrated as their archbishop. It is recorded that
he lost no time in engaging with indefatigable zeal in the work
committed to him.
It was his earnest desire, as it had been that of Augustine,
to unite with the British Church, in the work of evangelizing
Britain. Towards the British bishops he was apparently
disposed to adopt a more conciliatory attitude than that of his
predecessor (q.v.), but continued to urge on them the necessity
of conforming to the customs of the Roman Church. He
wrote to the Irish, or Scots as they were then called,2 in his
own name and in that of his colleagues, the bishops of London
and Rochester, complaining of the intolerant attitude shown
by one of their number towards himself and his followers.
The beginning of his epistle is thus quoted by Bede :
" To our most dear brethren the Lords bishops and abbots
1 Cf. Bede's Eccles. Hist., I. 27.
* The Scots were originally an Irish tribe who conquered the Picts
and settled in North Britain.
17
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
throughout the kingdom of the Scots, Laurentius, Mellitus
and Justus bishops, servants of the servants of God. When
the apostolic see, according to the universal custom which it
has followed elsewhere, sent us to these western parts to preach
to the pagan nations, and it was our lot to come into the
island which is called Britain, before we knew them we held
the Britons and Scots in great esteem for sanctity, believing
that they walked according to the custom of the universal
Church. But becoming acquainted with the Britons we
thought that the Scots had been better. Now we have
learned from Bishop Dagan, who came into the aforesaid
island, and from the abbot Columban in Gaul that the Scots
in no way differ from the Britons in their walk ; for when
Bishop Dagan came to us not only did he refuse to eat at
the same table, but even to eat in the same house where we
were entertained."3
Laurentius also wrote letters to the British bishops exhorting
them to conform to the Roman usage at least in the keeping
of Easter. But his attempts to unite with them appear to
have been fruitless. The British bishops continued to regard
the newcomers as aliens and foreigners, the attitude of
Augustine having offended them too deeply to leave any
hope of a reconciliation.
Though one eminent writer declares that Mellitus (q.v.)
on his return from Rome in 610 brought the pallium to
Laurentius,4 there is no authentic evidence that the arch-
bishop ever received this symbol of his archiepiscopal office.
In 613, the church of SS. Peter and Paul, founded by
Augustine at Canterbury was at length completed, and was
solemnly consecrated by Laurentius. King Ethelbert and
many of the people of Kent attended the consecration
ceremony. After a solemn service in the church the remains
of Queen Bertha, Augustine and Luidhard (vide Augustine)
were brought from the cemetery and laid to rest within the
building.5 This is the last public appearance recorded of the
noble King Ethelbert, to whom the English Church owes so
3 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 4.
1 Cf. Anglia Sacra, ed. Wharton, pt. 2, p. 678.
s The name of St. Augustine was gradually attached to the Church
and adjoining monastery in place of those of the two great Apostles.
18
Laurentius
much. He died on February 24, 616, and was buried in
St. Martin's chapel in the church of SS. Peter and Paul.
His death was a severe blow to the Kentish Church, which
through his generous protection had been hitherto free from
persecution. With the succession of his son Eadbald, who
was still a pagan, trouble began.
Ethelbert had left a young widow, and according to a
custom of the country Eadbald married his stepmother.
The severe rebuke which this marriage drew on him from
Laurentius roused his enmity against the archbishop. A
party opposed to the missionaries was formed with the king
as head, and Laurentius now found his designs thwarted on
every side. To add to the misfortunes of the Church, the
death of Sabert, the Christian king of Essex, also occurred
about this time. Sabert left three sons, who were all pagans,
to inherit his kingdom. They were not slow to find a cause
of quarrel with Mellitus, Bishop of London. According to
Bede6 the three princes claimed the right to attend mass and
to partake of the holy sacrament of the altar, although they
had not been baptized as Christians. On being refused the
consecrated bread they drove Mellitus from his see, and
ordered him to quit the country.
Mellitus made his way to Kent, and took counsel with his
fellow bishops Laurentius and Justus (of Rochester). The
prelates were not disposed to suffer martyrdom, and after due
deliberation they decided to leave England. Justus and Mellitus
set out for Gaul, and Laurentius prepared to follow them.
On the night before his departure from England, the
archbishop kept vigil near the tomb of his predecessor in the
church of SS. Peter and Paul. There with tears he poured
forth many prayers for the safety of the Church which he was
about to desert. Exhausted by weeping he at length fell
asleep. In the dead of night there appeared to him in a
dream the chief of the apostles, who sternly rebuked and
scourged him for his purposed desertion of his flock. " Hast
thou forgotten my example," said St. Peter, " who for the
sake of the little ones committed to me by Christ endured
bonds, stripes, imprisonments and even death on the cross
that I might at last be crowned with Him ? "7
6 Eccles. Hist., II. 5. ^ Ibid., II. 6.
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
When morning broke, Laurentius, deeply moved by the
vision, went to Eadbald and showed the marks of the stripes
inflicted on him by the Apostle. " Who has dared to inflict
scourging on so great a man ? " asked the astonished king.
On learning that the archbishop, for his soul's salvation, had
suffered these cruel blows at the hands of the Apostle of Christ,
he was greatly afraid. Abjuring the worship of idols, and
renouncing his unlawful marriage, he received Christian
baptism and promoted the interests of the Church to the
utmost of his power.8
Modern writers suggest that this story of the scourging
is probably a legendary exaggeration of a dream, in which
Laurentius imagined himself to have received such discipline
from his heavenly visitor, and in compunction he perhaps
afterwards inflicted it on himself. The recital of the dream
and the visible marks of the penance may have produced a
salutary effect on the mind of the king.9
But whatever be the true interpretation of the story, it
is certain that the decision of Laurentius to remain in England
was followed by the conversion and baptism of Eadbald.
The king now gave his support and protection to the Kentish
Church, and sent messengers to Gaul to recall Justus and
Mellitus.10 The fugitive bishops returned after a year's
absence. Justus was restored to the see of Rochester, but
the Londoners refused to receive Mellitus. Eadbald had
insufficient authority over the people of Essex to force them
to receive the bishop against their will, and the see of London
remained vacant for nearly forty years.
The last years of the episcopate of Laurentius appear to
have been uneventful. He died on February 2, 619, and
was buried near the tomb of his predecessor in the north
porch of the Church of SS. Peter and Paul11 at Canterbury.
8 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 6 ; cj. Florence of Worcester's Chronicle,
a.d. 616.
9 Cf. Bright's Chapters of Early Church Hist., pp. 118-119.
10 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 616.
11 St. Augustine's.
20
3.— MELLITUS, 619 to 624.
Eadbald, King of Kent, 616 to 640.
Mellitus, who had been driven from the see of London (vide
Laurentius), and who had probably resided at Canterbury
after his return from Gaul, was chosen archbishop on the
death of Laurentius. Of his early life nothing is known save
that he was of noble family.1 His designation as abbot in one
of Pope Gregory's epistles has led some writers to suppose
that he may have succeeded Augustine as abbot of the
monastery of St. Andrew on the Caelian Hill in Rome.2 He
was leader of the second band of Italian missionaries who
were sent by Pope Gregory to Britain, and who accompanied
Laurentius (q.v.) on his return from Rome in 601. Those
of his companions whose names have been preserved were
Justus, who succeeded him as archbishop of Canterbury,
Paulinus, who became archbishop of York, and Rufinianus
who became the third abbot of St. Augustine's Abbey.
Bede records that with this second band of missionaries,
Pope Gregory sent many things that were necessary for the
service of the Church, namely, sacred vessels, church orna-
ments, vestments for the clergy and relics of martyrs, besides
many books.3 Thomas of Elmham, a monk and treasurer
of St. Augustine's monastery at Canterbury, writing in the
fifteenth century, gives a catalogue of the original library of
the monastery brought to England by Mellitus, and states
that the books were still preserved at St. Augustine's in his
time.4
Pope Gregory showed special interest in the welfare of
Mellitus and his associates, for no less than sixteen letters
1 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 7.
2 Cf. Stubbs, art. on Mellitus in Diet, of. Christ. Biog.
3 Bede's Eccles. Hist., I. 29.
•» Historia Monasterii, S. Augustini Cantuariensis, by Thomas of
Elmham, ed. Hardwick, p. 96.
21
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
are extant addressed by him on their behalf, to the bishops
and rulers of the provinces through which they were to pass.
The pope seems to have been longer in hearing from them
than he had expected. Some time after their departure
he wrote to Mellitus expressing anxiety as to their welfare,
and instructing him how to reply to a question of Augustine's
concerning the propriety of using heathen temples as places
for Christian worship. He advises that after the idols have
been destroyed, the buildings, duly consecrated, should be
so used.5
The date given on this letter — June 17, 601, is obviously
an error, as the letters which Mellitus carried with him to
Britain bear the date of June 22 of the same year.
Mellitus, as already recorded, was consecrated bishop of
London by Augustine some time before 604. An episcopal
see had existed in London in Roman times. Some years
before the arrival of Augustine the British bishop of London
is said to have fled from the persecution of the heathen English,
and to have taken refuge in Wales.
When Christianity had been to some extent established
in the Kingdom of the East Saxons through the preaching of
Mellitus, King Ethelbert founded the church of St. Paul, in
London, on the site of the present cathedral.6 The story that
a church was also founded by Ethelbert at Westminster at the
same time has insufficient evidence to support it, though it is
possible that a British church existed there at an even earlier
period.7 About the year 609, Mellitus returned to Rome to
consult with Pope Boniface IV. concerning the affairs of the
English Church. He was honourably received by the pope
and assisted at a council which was then siting in Rome to
settle certain questions as to the rule of monasteries. The
genuine decrees of this council have not been preserved, those
extant being generally considered spurious.8
On his return to England, Mellitus took with him two
letters from Pope Boniface, one being addressed to the arch-
bishop of Canterbury and the English clergy, and the other
to King Ethelbert and the English people. The original
s Bede's Eccles. Hist., I. 30. 6 Ibid., II. 3.
7 Cf. Dugdale's Monasticon Anglicanum, Vol. I., p. 265.
8 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 4.
22
Mellitus
decrees and letters were probably all lost. A fictitious copy
of the letter to Ethelbert is extant, in which the pope orders
monks to be associated with the clergy of the cathedral
church at Canterbury.9 This letter was produced for the first
time in the eleventh century in order to support the claims
of Canterbury to supremacy over York.
After his election as archbishop of Canterbury in 619,
Mellitus laboured with great zeal to spread the gospel message
throughout Britain. Though he suffered constantly from
gout, he was of a cheerful disposition, and ever despising
earthly honour fixed his mind on heavenly things.
Pope Boniface V. addressed letters of exhortation to Mellitus
and to Justus, Bishop of Rochester, but the letter to Mellitus
appears to have been lost. The extant copy of this letter
is believed to be spurious, as are also a number of charters in
which the name of Mellitus occurs. Most of these profess to
convey grants of land and privileges, from Pope Boniface IV.,
Eadbald and others to the monastery of St. Augustine.10
It is recorded that one day an alarming fire broke out in
Canterbury, and spread with such rapidity that the whole
city was in danger of being consumed. Mellitus, who was
unable to walk, ordered his servants to carry him to a certain
part of the city known as the place of the Four Crowned
Martyrs, where the fire raged most fiercely. The archbishop,
on being brought thither prayed earnestly and by this means
was able to accomplish what strong men had failed to
perform by much labour. For the wind which had been
blowing from the south and thus spreading the fire through-
out the city, suddenly veered to the north, in which direction
there were no buildings, so that the flames were extin-
guished.11
Mellitus is also recorded to have consecrated a church or
chapel, which had been founded by King Eadbald at
Canterbury in honour of the Blessed Virgin.12
» Councils and Eccles. Documents relating to Great Britain and
Ireland, ed. Haddan and Stubbs, Vol. III., p. 65.
10 Ibid., p. 71 ; Hist. Monast. S. Augustini Cant., by Thomas of
Elmham, ed. Hardwick, p. 129.
11 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 7.
" Hist. Monast. S. Augustini Cant., p. 144.
23
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
In spite of the archbishop's zeal Christianity seems to have
made little progress in Britain during this episcopate.
Mellitus died on February 24, 624, and was buried near
his predecessors in the church of SS. Peter and Paul, at St.
Augustine's monastery.
24
4-— JUSTUS, 624 to 627. S.
Eadbald, King of Kent, 6i6^to 640.
The successor of Mellitus in the archiepiscopal see of
Canterbury had already attained prominence as bishop of
Rochester. As previously recorded, Justus had been one
of the second band of missionaries sent by Pope Gregory to
Britain, and had been ordained bishop of Rochester by
Augustine (q. v.) shortly before the death of the latter. During
the persecution under Eadbald of Kent, he had fled to Gaul
in company with Mellitus, but returned to his see after the
conversion of the king to Christianity (vide Laurentius).
The question whether Justus was a monk or a priest at
the time of his arrival in Britain has been debated by certain
writers. In the list of donations made by King Ethelbert
to the church of St. Andrew, founded by him at Rochester,
there is mention of a piece of land called Priestfield, and " all
the land between the Medway to the east gate of the town on
the south part, and other lands between the wall of the city
towards the north part."1 The name of Priestfield has led
some writers to infer that Justus was a priest and not a
monk (cf. Stubbs in " Diet, of Christ. Biog.," Art. on Justus),
though this is contrary to the opinion of Thomas of Elmham,
and the other early historians of Canterbury. Justus was
probably an aged man at the time of his elevation to the
archbishopric.
A letter dated 624 is extant, addressed by Pope Boniface V.
to Justus, and was evidently sent along with the pallium,
Justus being the first archbishop since Augustine to receive
this symbol of the episcopal office. In this letter, which is
undoubtedly genuine, the pope commends Justus for the share
he had taken in the conversion of Eadbald (vide Laurentius),
and gives him the right to ordain bishops.2
1 Wharton's Anglia Sacra, Vol. I., p. 333.
2 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 8.
25
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Another letter from Boniface V. to Justus is extant, in
which the pope gives the primacy of the whole English Church
to Canterbury. This letter belongs to a series of ten spurious
documents, forged in the interests of the see of Canterbury,
and produced for the first time by Lanfranc (q.v.) in 1072,
at the Council of London.3
It was doubtless after receiving the first letter from Boni-
face that Justus ordained Romanus his successor in the see
of Rochester. Romanus was afterwards sent by Justus
as his legate to Rome, but was drowned on the way, and thus
the see of Rochester again became vacant.4
The great event of Justus's episcopate was the conversion
of the Northumbrians to Christianity. Eadbald of Kent
had consented to give his sister in marriage to Edwin the
powerful pagan king of Northumbria, on condition that
she should be allowed the free exercise of her religion. On
July 21, 625, Justus ordained as bishop Paulinus, who
had accompanied him from Rome, and it was agreed that
this prelate should go with the princess Ethelburga to
Northumbria.
The first of the Northumbrians to be baptized by Paulinus
was Eanfled, the infant daughter whom Ethelburga bore to
King Edwin. She with twelve others of her family was
baptized on Whitsunday, 626.5 Although in his youth
Edwin is said to have come under the influence of Paulinus,
whom he met while an exile at the court of Redwald, an
East Anglian king, it was not until about two years after
his marriage that he decided to accept Christianity. In 627,
he summoned a great meeting of his Witan, and asked his
counsellors their opinion about the worship of Christ. Strangely
enough, Coin, a priest of the pagan worship, is said to have
been one of the speakers at this assembly, and to have boldly
urged the destruction of the heathen temples.
The beautiful and eloquent speech of an English chief,
another speaker at this meeting, has come down the long stream
of ages to us. " The present life of man, O king," he said,
3 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pontificum Anglorutn, ed.
Hamilton, pp. 49-51 ; cf. Haddan and Stubbs, in Councils and Eccles.
Documents relating to Gt. Britain and Ireland, III., 66.
4 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 20. s Ibid. II. 9.
26
Justus
" seems to me in comparison with the time which is unknown
to us, like the swift flight of a sparrow through the room
where you sit at supper, in winter, with your guests, and
a great fire in the midst, and rain and storm without. So
the life of man appears for a short space, but of what went
before or what is to follow after we are ignorant. If, there-
fore, this new doctrine contains something more certain,
it seems justly to deserve to be followed."6 The result of
this meeting was that King Edwin and his counsellors received
Christian baptism at York, on Easter day, 627.
The news of Edwin's baptism must have gladdened the
heart of the aged archbishop, whose end was approaching.
Justus died on 10th November, 627, and was buried in the
church of St. Augustine's monastery, by the side of his friends
and fellow-labourers, Augustine, Laurentius, and Mellitus.
6 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 13.
27
5.— HONORIUS, 627 (?) to 653.
Eadbald, King of Kent, 616 to 640.
Earconbert, King of Kent, 640 to 664.
We have seen that it was originally the intention of Pope
Gregory the Great to appoint two English archbishops, one
for London and the other for York. Each of these was to
have jurisdiction over twelve suffragan bishops, and when
a vacancy occurred the new prelate was to be consecrated
by his own synod. It was, however, found impossible to
carry out this arrangement, For reasons already stated,
Canterbury remained the metropolitan see of the south,
and in the time of Augustine and his immediate successors
only three bishoprics were established in England.
When it became necessary to consecrate Honorius the
successor-elect of Justus, there was no bishop in his own
diocese to perform the ceremony, the sees of London and
Rochester being both vacant (vide Justus). He therefore
applied for consecration to Paulinus of York, who was then
the only bishop in the English Church. The prelates met at
Lincoln, where Honorius was consecrated fifth archbishop of
Canterbury. The ceremony took place in a stone church,
erected by Blecca, the governor of Lincoln, who had been
converted to Christianity by the preaching of Paulinus.1
The exact date of the consecration of Honorius has not been
ascertained, but it was probably early in the year 628.
Of the early life of Honorius nothing is known, save that
he was a pupil of Pope Gregory the Great, and had accom-
panied Augustine from Rome. A letter dated 634 was
addressed by Pope Honorius I. to Archbishop Honorius,
and was sent to England along with two pallia, one for
Honorius and the other for Paulinus, who was thus
recognized as first bishop of York. In this letter, which
is undoubtedly genuine, the pope granted equal authority
1 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 16.
28
Honorius
to the two bishops, and the right of each to appoint the
other's successor in case of a vacancy.2 The pope also
wrote at the same time to Edwin of Northumbria, congratula-
ting the king on his conversion, and mentioning that he had
bestowed pallia on Honorius and Paulinus.3 Another letter
from Pope Honorius I. to Archbishop Honorius is quoted
by William of Malmesbury,4 but, like others of the same
series, its authenticity is questionable (Vide Justus). In
this letter the pope grants the supremacy to Canterbury,
though it is obviously improbable that he should have thus
contradicted the regulations made in his first letter.
King Edwin never received the pope's letter, for, though
news of his death had not reached Rome, he had been slain
by Penda, the pagan king of Mercia, at the battle of Hatfield
in Yorkshire, in the previous year. His death involved the
downfall of the Christian Church in Northumbria. Penda
marched through the country with his pagan army burning
and slaying with horrible barbarity. The Christian churches
were destroyed and Paulinus, in company with the widowed
Queen Ethelburga and her children, fled to Kent.5 There
the queen remained for the rest of her days, and died abbess
of the convent of Lyminge, which she had founded, seven
miles from Folkestone. Honorius received Paulinus with
much honour, and soon afterwards, with the consent of King
Eadbald, consecrated him to the vacant see of Rochester.6
Fortunately, however, Christianity had not become wholly
extinct in Northumbria. A certain deacon named James,
who had been associated with Paulinus in his missionary
work, remained faithfully at his post, and risking death at
the hands of the pagan conqueror, continued to teach and
baptize, rescuing many from the power of evil. James was
a skilful musician, and after the re-establishment of Chris-
tianity in Northumbria, introduced singing in the churches,
according to the Roman custom.7
In the year following the death of Edwin, a Christian king
named Oswald, who had spent his youth in the Scottish
1 Bede's Eccles. Hist. II. 18. 3 Ibid.
* De Gestis Pontificum Anglorum, ed. Hamilton, pp. 49-51.
s Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 633.
6 Bede's Eccles. Hist., II. 20. » Ibid.
29
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
monastery of Iona, succeeded to the throne of Northumbria.
Oswald having sent to Iona for a missionary, a Celtic monk
named Aidan came in the year 635. Aidan established his
see in the little island of Lindisfarne, off the coast of
Northumberland, afterwards known as Holy Isle. Of his
unselfish and loving labour there are many records carefully
preserved even by the monks and clergy of the English
Church, though the Celtic bishops still refused to communicate
with the former or to adopt their customs. Aidan and King
Oswald laboured together as devoted friends for eight years,
until Oswald's defeat and death at the hands of the merciless
Penda. An ancient legend tells that Oswald's right hand,
which had been blessed by Aidan for its almsgiving to the
poor, was found on the field of battle, was kept as a relic, and
remained for ever uncorrupted.8 The truth underlying this
legend is that the memory of Oswald's gentle charity is with
us to-day undimmed by time.
Meantime, Christianity had been established in East Anglia,
Sigebert, King of the East Angles, when in exile in France,
had been converted to the Christian faith. With his approval,
Felix, a bishop from Burgundy, was consecrated by Archbishop
Honorius, and sent to preach to the East Angles. A see
was assigned to Felix at a place called Dunwich, which no
longer exists, having been overwhelmed by the sea. The
town of Felixstowe, " the dwelling of Felix," on the Suffolk
coast,9 is said to be named after him.
In the year 633, with the sanction of the Roman see, a new
mission under an Italian named Birinus arrived in England.
Communication with Rome seems at this time to have been
customary only at rare intervals, and the idea may have existed
in Italy that the Canterbury mission had been a failure. There
is indeed strong evidence that the first Italian missionaries
were lacking in courage and energy and, having little in
common with the rude English among whom they laboured,
were apt to over-estimate the difficulty of enlarging the
boundaries of the Kentish Church. None the less, in spite
of their errors, their genuine piety, charity and devotion
were long remembered with gratitude by the English people.
8 Bede's Eccles. Hist., III. 6.
9 Cf. Note to Bede's Eccles. Hist., ed. Bohn, p. 99.
30
Honorius
Birinus had received consecration from Asterius, Bishop of
Genoa, and had landed in Britain with the intention of preach-
ing Christianity in the midland regions. On finding, however,
that the gospel had not yet been preached in Wessex, he deter-
mined to remain there. In a short time, Cynegils, King of
Wessex was baptized, King Oswald of Northumbria, who had
come to Wessex on a visit, being present at the ceremony and
standing as his godfather. To Birinus was assigned the see of
Dorchester10 (eight-and-a-half miles from Oxford) from which
afterwards arose the bishopric of Lincoln. The see of
Winchester was founded in the time of Agilbert, the successor
of Birinus."
In 640, occurred the death of Eadbald, King of Kent, who
since his conversion had proved a true friend to the English
Church. His son and successor, Earconbert, was the first
English king to issue a degree for the destruction of idols within
his kingdom. He also commanded that the Lenten fast of
forty days should be strictly observed, and imposed penalties
on those who neglected it.12
On the death of Paulinus, in 644, Honorius consecrated to
the see of Rochester, Ithamar, a native of Kent, the first
Englishman to be made a bishop.13 It is recorded of Honorius
that he ordained two East Anglian bishops, the successors of
Felix, but there is no evidence that he otherwise exercised
jurisdiction beyond Kent. He was probably an aged man
at the time of his death, which occurred on September 30,
653. He was buried in the church of St. Augustine's
monastery at Canterbury.
10 Bede's Eccles. Hist., III. 7.
" Ibid.
12 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 640.
«J Bede's Eccles. Hist., III. 14.
31
6.— DEUSDEDIT, 655 to 664.
Oswy, King of Northumbria, 643 to 671.
Earconbert, King of Kent, 640 to 664.
The death of Honorius was followed by a vacancy of
eighteen months in the see of Canterbury. The difficulty in
appointing a new archbishop was doubtless due to the state of
disunion which then existed among the English churches.
Until the beginning of 664, the whole of Christian England,
except Kent, East Anglia, Wessex and Sussex, remained
attached to the Celtic communion. Wessex, which had been
Christianized by a mission from Gaul (vide Honorius), was
still under bishops ordained abroad, who were in communion
with the Celtic Church. Sussex meantime was still heathen.
Thus Kent and East Anglia alone were completely in com-
munion with both Rome and Canterbury.1
This state of matters rendered impossible the choice of an
archbishop who would satisfy all parties. The vacancy
continued until March 655, when the clergy and monks of
Canterbury, with the consent of King Earconbert, chose as their
archbishop a West Saxon named Frithonas,2 the first English-
man to occupy the chair of Augustine. Of his previous life
nothing is known, but it seems probable that he had been
converted to Christianity by the mission under Birinus (vide
Honorius). On his election, he took the name of Deusdedit,
probably in the hope of avoiding any offence that might be
caused by the choice of an Englishman. His consecration
took place at Canterbury, on April 26, 655, the ceremony
being performed by Ithamar, Bishop of Rochester, who was
also an Englishman.
Of the acts of Deusdedit, very little is recorded and it seems
evident that he had no great share in the general life and work
1 Councils and Eccles. Documents relating to Great Britain and
Ireland, ed. Haddan and Stubbs, III. 106.
2 Hist. Monast. S. Augustini Cant., by Thomas of Elmham, p. 193.
32
Deusdedit
of the Church. Bright describes the primacy of this time
as "a force lying dormant until the epoch that was to
awake it into energy."3
In the year 657, Deusdedit, at the invitation of Wulfhere,
King of Mercia, went to Medeshamstede (Peterborough),
and consecrated the new monastery which had been founded
there by the king's brother Peada, and by King Oswy of
Northumbria. The bishops of Rochester, London, Lindis-
farne, and Mercia, were present at the ceremony, as well as the
king and royal family of Mercia, and a large number of clergy
and nobles from all parts of the country.4
It is also recorded that Deusdedit consecrated a convent
with seventy nuns in the Isle of Thanet,5 but certain legendary
details given in connection with this story have caused modern
writers to doubt its authenticity.
Of the six or seven bishops elected in England, in the epis-
copate of Deusdedit, only one, Damianus of Rochester, was
consecrated by him, the others receiving the rite from Celtic
or French bishops.6 When Wilfrid, the most famous church-
man of his age, was elected bishop of Northumbria, he
journeyed to Gaul to receive consecration, refusing to receive
it from Deusdedit on the ground that he had been in connection
with the Celtic party.7
The synod of Whitby was held towards the close of Deus-
dedit's episcopate, but there is no evidence that he was even
represented at this important conference. As his death
occurred shortly afterwards he may have been prevented by
illness from being present. The synod was convened chiefly
through the zeal of Wilfrid, then abbot of Ripon, the object of
it being to consider the questions which divided the Celtic
and English Churches, and if possible, to put an end to the
schism. The conference was held at the convent of Streons-
halch, afterwards called Whitby, over which the Abbess Hilda
presided. It was almost entirely a Northumbrian gathering,
except for Cedd the Celtic bishop of London, who had been
attracted thither by his connection with the north. King
3 Chapters of Early Church Hist., p. 199.
< Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 657.
s Simeon of Durham, De Gestis Regum Ang. ; cf. Monumenta Historica
Britannica, ed. Petrie and Sharpe, p. 649.
6 Bede's Eccles. Hist., III. passim. 7 Ibid.
33
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Oswy, of Northumbria, and his son Aldfrid, were present.
The Celtic side was represented chiefly by Cedd and by Colman,
Bishop of Lindisfarne ; the opposite side by Agilbert, Bishop of
Dorchester in Oxfordshire, and by Wilfrid, Abbot of Ripon.
Agilbert deputed Wilfrid to speak for him, and the eloquence
of the young abbot won the votes of the assembly in favour of
the Roman system.8
Wilfrid was the son of a Northumbrian nobleman, and had
been educated in a Celtic monastery. A journey which he
made to Rome, and a residence of some years at Lyons had
influenced him strongly in favour of the superior culture and
civilization of the Roman church. As the chief difference
between the Celtic and Roman Churches related to the date of
keeping Easter, Wilfrid in an eloquent speech urged that the
Roman custom had the authority of St. Peter. The question
was then raised whether the date observed by St. Peter was
not the one which ought to be kept. After a prolonged
discussion, it was finally conceded by the Celtic party that
St. Peter being the prince of the Apostles, and the bishop of
Rome St. Peter's successor, they were bound to obey the
commands of the bishop of Rome. This was an important
victory for the Italians. Colman alone refused to comply
with the Catholic usage, and withdrew to Scotland. His
successor Tuda died a few months later of the pestilence,
and Wilfrid was appointed in his place as bishop of North-
umbria.
It was probably the same pestilence which had carried off
Tuda that caused the death of Deusdedit. He and Earcon-
bert, King of Kent, are said to have died on the same day —
July 14, 664. He was buried in the porch of St. Augustine's
monastery, at Canterbury.
Shortly after the death of Deusdedit, Wighard, an English-
man, who had been educated in the monastery at Canterbury,
and had acted as chaplain to the late primate was elected arch-
bishop. As it was found impossible to select his consecrator
without giving offence to one or other of the parties within the
church, King Egbert, with the approval of King Oswy of
Northumbria, sent him to Rome for consecration by Pope
Vitalian.
■ Ibid., III. 25.
34
Deusdedit
Wighard arrived in Rome, but before his consecration could
take place he was seized with the plague, and died along with
many of his companions. Pope Vitalian then wrote to King
Oswy of Northumbria, informing him of the death of Wighard,
and stating that he himself would choose a new archbishop
for the see of Canterbury.9
9 Ibid., III. 29.
35
7.— THEODORE, 668 to 690.
Egbert, King of Kent, 664 to 673.
LoTHAiR, King of Kent, 673 to 685.
Oswy, King of Northumbria, 643 to 671.
Egfrid, King of Northumbria, 671 to 685.
Wulfhere, King of Mercia, 657 to 675.
Ethelred, King of Mercia, 675 to 704.
The prelate chosen to succeed Deusdedit is distinguished
from his predecessors as being the first able and eminent
churchman to occupy the chair of St. Augustine. Though
the see had been hitherto filled by prelates of blameless life,
their mediocre talents and limited capacity had caused them
to sink into the position of provincials, with little or no
authority beyond Kent. With the advent of Theodore,
Canterbury was to assume a national importance which the
see never again wholly lost.
During part of the vacancy of nearly five years, which
followed the death of Deusdedit (q.v.), Wilfrid of North-
umbria, who had returned from Gaul after a prolonged
absence to find his see occupied by Chad, was permitted to
exercise episcopal functions in Kent and Mercia. Meantime,
Pope Vitalian had taken steps to fill the vacant see, fixing
his choice on a certain African named Hadrian, abbot of
a Niridian monastery, near Naples. The abbot, however,
begged to be excused from accepting so great a dignity,
and proposed as a substitute a monk named Theodore, who
was then in Rome.1 It was with some reluctance that the
pope agreed to Hadrian's choice.
Theodore was a native of the Greek city of Tarsus, in Cilicia,
and was born in or about the year 602. He had studied at
Athens, and was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. His
knowledge of sacred and profane literature, and of philosophy,
had obtained for him the surname of " Philosopher." That he
was a man of considerable experience and extraordinary
■ Bede's Eccles. Hist., IV. x.
36
Theodore
energy, in spite of his sixty-six years, is amply proved by his
later career. His presence in Rome at that time has not been
explained, but modern writers have suggested that he may
have come thither in the train of the Emperor Constans II.,
who visited the pope in 663.*
As the Greek Church was at this time much infected by the
Monothelite heresy, Pope Vitalian was somewhat doubtful
of the orthodoxy of Theodore, and stipulated as a condition
of the arrangement that Hadrian should accompany him
to Britain. Theodore was ordained sub-deacon, and as
his whole head had been shaven after the Greek manner, he
was obliged to wait four months for his hair to grow before
receiving the Roman tonsure. He was then rapidly advanced
to the higher clerical orders, and on Sunday, March 26, 668,
was consecrated archbishop by Pope Vitalian.3
It was not until May 27 of the same year, that Theodore
set out for Britain. He was accompanied by Hadrian and by
Benedict Biscop, a Northumbrian monk, who was then on a
pilgrimage to Rome, and who, at the pope's desire, had con-
sented to act as interpreter to the party. They proceeded
by sea to Marseilles and thence to Aries, where they delivered
commendatory letters from Pope Vitalian to John, Arch-
bishop of that city.
John applied to Ebroin, the mayor of the palace, for per-
mission for his guests to proceed on their journey. But Ebroin
seems to have suspected that they were envoys from the Greek
Emperor, engaged in carrying on political intrigues with the
kings of Britain. He accordingly detained Hadrian, while
permitting Theodore and Benedict Biscop to proceed to Paris.
There Theodore was honourably entertained by Agilbert,
Bishop of Paris, who had formerly been bishop of the West
Saxons (vide Deusdedit). With him, Theodore remained
during the winter. At length King Egbert of Kent, hearing
that the archbishop was in Paris, sent his high reeve Raedfrith,
to conduct him to Britain. Theodore, with his escort, reached
the port of Etaples, where he was detained for some time by
illness, and it was not until May 27, 669, that he reached
Canterbury.4 He was received with great joy by the people
J Cf. Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, vol. L, p. 343.
3 Bede, ibid., IV. 1. « Ibid.
37
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
of Kent who for nearly five years had been without a
bishop.
The task which lay before Theodore was no light one.
Though the English and Celtic Churches had been nominally
reconciled at the synod of Whitby (vide Deusdedit), the
jealousies and petty strife which their disputes had originated
had not yet died out between the different parties. Theodore
at the age of sixty-seven began his work with a vigour and
energy which would have been remarkable even in a man in
the prime of life. His first work was to visit all the Christian
churches in England. On the journey he was accompanied
by Hadrian, who had been permitted to join him soon after
his arrival in England. Benedict Biscop, whom he had
appointed abbot of St. Augustine's, remained in Canterbury.5
Wherever he went the archbishop was well received, and
honourably entertained. The fact that he had been sent
directly from the pope served to increase his authority. He
insisted that the Roman usages should be observed everywhere,
and refused to recognize bishops who had been consecrated
by Britons or Scots, unless they consented to receive re-con-
secration from himself. He found all the English bishoprics
vacant except London and Northumbria, and in the latter
Chad and Wilfrid were rival claimants for the see. He,
therefore, consecrated a number of new bishops, and as the
existing dioceses were very large he determined to sub-divide
them.6
Theodore's experience in ecclesiastical government had
taught him the importance of synodical action for promoting
unity in the Church. On September 24, 673, he convened at
Hertford, the first council, properly so called, of the English
Church. This meeting was attended by bishops from all parts
of England and is of extreme importance as being the first of
our national gatherings for general legislation. National unity
thus became possible first in the Church, for it was not until
a much later time that the men of Mercia, Northumbria, and
Wessex, learned to come together in the Witenagemot of all
England.7
s Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 669.
6 Bede, ibid., IV. 2.
i Cf. Green's Making of England, Vol. II., p. 97.
38
Theodore
At the council of Hertford, ten canons were drawn up by
Theodore, and nine of these were unanimously passed and
signed by the assembled bishops. They decreed (i) that the
Roman Easter should be kept. (2) That no bishop should
interfere in the diocese of another. (3) That monasteries
should be free from episcopal interference. (4) That monks
should not wander from their own monasteries, (5) nor clergy
from their own dioceses. (6) That clergy should not offi-
ciate in dioceses other than their own, without the consent of
the bishop. (7) That synods should meet at least once a year,
and if possible twice, at a place called Clovesho, which has not
been identified, but which was probably either in Kent or on
the borders of Mercia. (8) That bishops should take rank
according to the date of their consecration. (9) That new
bishoprics should be created as the number of Christians
increased. The decision on this point was deferred, as
Theodore was unable to obtain the general consent of the
bishops to a division of their dioceses. (10) That divorce
should be granted only according to the rules laid down in the
Scriptures.8 With the passing of these canons a general
system of discipline commenced in the English Church.
Theodore had determined to sub-divide all the English
dioceses except Kent and London. Although in this work
he met with considerable opposition, he succeeded in carrying
it out, except in Wessex, which, for some reason not clearly
stated, remained undivided until the time of his successor.
He appears to have made the divisions which he saw to be
necessary entirely on his own authority. The difficulties
which he had to overcome have not been fully recorded, but
it is evident that he came into conflict with several bishops
over the question, and we learn that, on one occasion at least,
he did not hesitate to depose a bishop for insubordination.9
Though Theodore was a born organizer he sometimes
carried out his reforms in an arbitrary and inconsiderate
fashion. This appears to have been the case in Northumbria.
In 669, Theodore had translated Chad to Mercia and
restored Wilfrid to the bishopric of Northumbria. For a time
Wilfrid enjoyed the favour of King Egfrid of Northumbria,
and became the spiritual adviser of Queen Etheldreda, whom
8 Bede, ibid., IV. 5. 9 ibid. IV.. 28.
39
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
he unwisely encouraged to live as a virgin apart from her
husband. In 672, he gave her the veil. This caused him to
lose favour with Egfrid, who had long been jealous of his power
and wealth, and whose second wife, Irminburga, became his
formidable enemy.
In 678, Egfrid invited Archbishop Theodore to visit him,
and without consulting Wilfrid they decided to divide North-
umbria into four dioceses, namely Bernicia, Deira, Lindsey,
and York — Wilfrid retaining York only. Wilfrid, justly
indignant that he had not been consulted with [regard to
the division, refused to agree to it, and was forced to leave
the country. He journeyed to Rome to make his appeal
to pope Agatho against Theodore. The Pope decreed that
Wilfrid should be reinstated in the see of York only, but
that he should be permitted to chose the bishops himself
for the new dioceses of Northumbria. He returned to
England, but owing to the enmity of King Egfrid the pope's
order was not carried out until the year 686. I0
In Easter week, 680, Pope Agatho held a council in Rome,
to confer concerning the Monothelite heresy. Archbishop
Theodore had been invited to attend this council but declined
to undertake the journey, probably on account of his advanced
age. The fact that his enemy Wilfrid was then in Rome,
may have also deterred him from accepting the invitation.
At this council the pope decided to send as his envoy
to England the Abbot John, in order that he might elicit
from the English churches, a declaration of their orthodoxy.11
Though Theodore had seen fit to ignore the pope's orders
with regard to Wilfrid, he was anxious to prove to His Holiness
that the English churches were entirely free from any taint
of heresy. In September of the same year he assembled,
at the pope's desire, a council at Hatfield, in Herts, at which
the papal envoy was present. The assembled bishops were
unanimous in solemnly declaring full adherence to the
Catholic faith, and John was given a copy of their profession
to carry back to the pope.12
In 679, Theodore succeeded in bringing about a reconcilia-
tion between King Egfrid of Northumbria and King
10 Bede, IV., passim. " Bede, ibid. IV., 18.
12 Hadden and Stubbs, Councils, Vol. III., p. 141.
40
Theodore
Ethelred of Mercia, thus putting an end to the war which
had long raged between the two kingdoms.13
Concerning Theodore, an anecdote has been preserved, which
serves to show that his somewhat arbitrary character was
tinged with kindliness and humour. The holy and venerable
Bishop Chad, whom Theodore made bishop of Mercia after
deposing him from Northumbria, was accustomed to make
long journeys on foot throughout his diocese. As in this res-
pect he disobeyed the archbishop's kind command, Theodore
on one occasion with his own hands lifted him on horseback,
and afterwards obliged him to ride wherever he had need to
go.14
In 686, after the death of King Egfrid, Theodore caused
Wilfrid to be reinstated in the bishoprics of York and Hexham,
and in the abbacy of Ripon. According to Eddius, the bio-
grapher of Wilfrid, Theodore acknowledged himself to have
been in the wrong, and nominated Wilfrid his successor in the
see of Canterbury.15 But this and many other statements
made by Eddius, who was one of Wilfrid's clergy, and his
devoted admirer, are open to doubt.
The reconciliation with Wilfrid is the last recorded act
of Theodore. He died on September 19, 690, and was buried
in the church of St. Augustine, Canterbury.
It would be difficult to overestimate the debt which our
Church owes to Theodore. " He was," says Dr. Stubbs, " the
real founder of the diocesan system in the English Church,
and in that work laid the foundation of English national
unity."16 His educational reforms were equally important,
for he introduced into the English monasteries the learning
and culture of the East. With the aid of Benedict Biscop,
and of Hadrian who succeeded the former as abbot of St.
Augustine's, he established a school in that monastery which
became famous throughout Europe, and in which he himself
taught. Latin, Greek, music, theology, astronomy, and even
medicine, were among the subjects of instruction. Many of
Theodore's scholars afterwards rose to eminence in the Church,
and others proceeded as missionaries to carry the message of
'3 Bede, ibid., IV., 21. «i Ibid., IV., 3.
•3 Vita. Wilfridi, c. xlii.
,5 Art. on Theodore in Diet, of Christian Biog.
41
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the gospel to the unconverted parts of France and Germany.
Under the influence of Benedict Biscop a great monastic
movement took place in England, at this time, and the monas-
teries at Wearmouth and Jarrow were founded.17 The state-
ment made by Thomas of Elmham, that Theodore established
the parochial system in England18 is erroneous, though he
certainly paved the way for it.
A remarkable work known as the " Penitential of Theodore "
has been preserved. This can only be considered his work in so
far as it was drawn up under his eyes and published with his
authority. According to the preface, it is a collection of
answers given by him to persons questioning him on the sub-
ject of penance. In Book II. are added answers to questions
on the whole range of ecclesiastical discipline. Most of these
were received by a priest named Eodi " of blessed memory,"
of whom nothing is known. They were edited by a person who
gives himself the title of Discipulus Umbrensium, meaning
thereby either a native of Northumbria, or more probably
an Englishman, of southern birth, who had studied under
northern scholars.19 The Penitential of Theodore has been
printed in " Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating
to Great Britain and Ireland," Vol. III. pp. 173-213, edited by
Haddan and Stubbs.
•* Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 682.
18 Hist. Monast. S. Aug. Cant., p. 285.
'9 Cf. Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., p. 173.
42
8.— BRIHTWALD, 692 to 731.
Withred, King of Kent, 694 to 725.
Eadbert, King of Kent, 725 to 748.
Ina, King of Wessex, 688 to 728.
Aldfrid, King of Northumbria, 685 to 705.
Osred, King of Northumbria, 705 to 716.
Ethelred, King of Mercia, 675 to 704.
After the death of Theodore, the see of Canterbury remained
vacant for nearly two years, and it was not until July, 692,
that Brihtwald or Berctwald, an Englishman, whose name
has been variously spelt by different writers, was elected
archbishop. At the time of his election he was abbot of the
monastery of Reculver, which had been originally a palace of
the Kentish kings {vide Augustine). A charter dated 679
has been preserved, in which Hlotheri, King of Kent, granted
lands to Abbot Brihtwald and to his monastery.1
William of Malmesbury states that he had been abbot of
Glastonbury, but this is evidently an error due to the confusion
of Brihtwald with an abbot of similar name, who lived at a
later period.2
For some reason which has not been explained, Brihtwald
journeyed to France to receive consecration. This was not
for lack of bishops in England, but may have been due to the
belief that his consecration would have greater weight if
performed by the primate of a continental Church.3 The
ceremony was performed by Godwin, Archbishop of Lyons,
on June 29, 693, and on August 31 Brihtwald was enthroned
at Canterbury.
William of Malmesbury quotes two letters of Pope Sergius I.(
both dated 693, one being addressed to the kings of Northum-
bria, Mercia and East Anglia, and the other to the bishops of
Britain. In these Sergius grants the supremacy to Canterbury
1 Kemble, Codex, Dip., I. 16.
1 Cf. Wright's Biog. Brit. Lit., Vol. I., p. 180.
3 Cf. Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 228.
43
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and exhorts the English bishops to obey Brihtwald as they
would the pope himself.4 The letters belong, however, to a
series already mentioned, of which the authenticity is doubtful
(vide Justus).
Brihtwald is recorded to have been present at a Mercian
Witanagemot held in 693 at which he attested a grant of
land given by Oshere, underking of the Hwiccas, for a nunnery
at Penitanham in Worcestershire. The grant was witnessed
by Ethelred, King of Mercia, by Brihtwald, and by seven other
bishops.5 The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that King
Withred of Kent, soon after his accession, held a council at
Baccancelde (probably Bapchild near Sittingbourne in Kent),
at which Archbishop Brihtwald and Tobias, Bishop of
Rochester, were present, together with many abbots, clergy
and great men of the kingdom. The council was convened for
the purpose of promoting certain ecclesiastical reforms, and
also to confirm grants made by previous kings to the
Kentish churches.6 The archbishop was authorized to fill
vacant abbeys. A copy of the document containing the
decrees of this council has been preserved and is known as
the *' Privilege of Withred."7
In 702, Brihtwald was invited by King Aldfrid, of North-
umbria, to preside at a council held at a place called
Estrefeld or Onestrefield, probably near Ripon, at which
Wilfrid of York was condemned and excommunicated (vide
Theodore). Wilfrid had opposed a new subdivision of his
diocese and, refusing to submit to the judgment of the king and
archbishop, again appealed to the pope. The stubborn old
man of seventy once again took the long and perilous journey
to Rome, and returned with a second papal mandate for his
restoration. But Aldfrid refused to annul the decision of
the synod.8
After his return, Wilfrid visited Archbishop Brihtwald at
Canterbury. The gentle character of the archbishop dis-
posed him to mediate on Wilfrid's behalf, for he desired above
4 Will, of Malmesbury, De Gestis, Pont. Attg., ed. Hamilton,
PP- 53-54-
s Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III. 229. 6 a.d. 694.
"> Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III. 238.
8 Eddius, Vita Wilfridi, c. xlviii.
44
Brihtwald
all things to secure peace for the Church. No steps were taken,
however, to reinstate Wilfrid until after the death of King
Aldfrid, which occurred in 705. Brihtwald then convened
another synod on the east side of the river Nidd, at which
Osred, the eight-years-old king of Northumbria, was present.
Through the tactful management of the archbishop a com-
promise was arranged by which Wilfrid agreed to accept the
see of Hexham and the abbey of Ripon.9 He died bishop of
Hexham in 709.
Brihtwald showed much zeal for missionary enterprise,
and during his episcopate many missionaries went from
England to labour among the pagans of Germany. In 692,
Wilbrord, who had been trained in Wilfrid's monastery at
Ripon and in Ireland, undertook amission, with eleven others,
to Frisia. There his labours were very successful, and he was
afterwards consecrated archbishop of Utrecht by Pope
Sergius I.10
About the same time, an Irish mission under Hewald the
White and Hewald the Black went to the mother country of
the Saxons.11 Winfred, a young West Saxon monk, better
known as Boniface, the name under which he was afterwards
consecrated bishop, also began his labours in Germany. In
letters of Boniface, which have been preserved, he mentions
the encouragement that he received from Brihtwald in his
early life.
The Christians of Devon and Cornwall still retained the
customs of the Celtic Church. At a West Saxon synod,
Brihtwald appointed Aldhelm, Abbot of Glastonbury, to urge
conformity to the Roman Easter on the Cornish churches.
Aldhelm addressed to Gerunt, Prince of Cornwall, a tactful
and courteous letter on the subject. He was the first English-
man to write books in Latin, and was the author of a notable
work dealing with the error of the Britons in not celebrating
Easter at the proper time. This work induced many to
conform to the Roman custom."
In 705 Brihtwald carried out a work which had been long
deferred, namely the sub-division of the diocese of Wessex.
According to one account his predecessor, Theodore (q. v.), had
9 Ibid. I0 Bede's Eccles. Hist. V., 11.
" Ibid., V. 9. " Ibid., V. 18.
45
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
promised that the diocese should remain undivided until
after the death of Bishop Hedda. Hedda died in 703, and
two years later, Brihtwald divided the diocese, creating a new
bishopric at Sherborne, to which Aldhelm was consecrated.
To Winchester he appointed a bishop named Daniel.13
An interesting letter has been preserved, written by
Brihtwald to Forthere, who succeeded Aldhelm as bishop of
Sherborne. In this letter, the archbishop begs Forthere to
induce Beorwald, the abbot of Glastonbury, to accept the
ransom of one hundred shillings offered for a slave girl by
her brother.14
At this time it became the custom for English kings and
nobles to make pilgrimages to Rome. In 688, Caedwalla,
King of the West Saxons, had set out for Rome, being desirous
of receiving baptism in the Church of the Blessed Apostles-
There he was baptized on Easter Day, 689, by Pope Sergius I.
" And being still in his white garments he fell sick and departed
this life to dwell for ever with the blessed in heaven."15 His
successor Ina also went to Rome where he embraced the
monastic life, and Ethelred, King of Mercia, became a monk
in 704.
The famous monastery of Evesham was founded about this
time, probably in the year 706.
Brihtwald died of old age in January, 731, having presided
over the English Church for the long period of thirty-eight-
and-a-half years from the time of his election. He was buried
in the abbey church of St. Augustine, Canterbury. Bede
states that though Brihtwald could not be compared to his
predecessor, the great Theodore, he was learned in the Scrip-
tures, and well instructed in ecclesiastical and monastic
discipline. He deserves high praise for his missionary zeal,
for his love of peace, and for his wise government of the Church
during a difficult period of her history.
»i Ibid.
»•» Hook's Archbishops of Canterbury, Vol. I., p. 187,
's Bede's Eccles. Hist., V. 6.
46
9.— TATWIN, 731 to 734.
Eadbert, King of Kent, 725 to 748.
Ethelbald, King of Mercia, 716 to 755.
Ceolwulf, King of Northumbria, 729 to 737.
Shortly after the death of Brihtwald, Tatwin, an English
priest from the Mercian monastery of Bredon, in Worcester-
shire, was chosen archbishop. His consecration seems to
have been attended with more ceremony than had hitherto
been usual in England. It took place at Canterbury on
June 10, 731, and was performed by four bishops, namely,
Daniel of Winchester, Ingwald of London, Aldwin of Lichfield
and Aldwulf of Rochester.1
Dr. Stubbs suggests that as Ethelbald of Mercia was by far
the most powerful king in England at this time, he may
have had some influence on the appointment of Tatwin,
especially as the monastery at Bredon had been endowed by
his cousin Eanwulf, grandfather of King Offa.3
Tatwin was probably already aged at the time of his conse-
cration. By Bede, whose contemporary he was, he is described
as a man renowned for religion and wisdom, and notably
learned in sacred writ. Hook in more bombastic language
writes of him as a distinguished scholar, poet and divine, a
description which the meagre account left of him by his con-
temporaries scarcely justifies.
It is probable that Tatwin wrote to Pope Gregory III.
informing him of his election to the see of Canterbury, for in
733 he received the pallium from Rome.3 The statement made
by certain writers that he journeyed to Rome to receive the
pallium rests solely on the authority of a letter quoted by
William of Malmesbury, which belongs to the series already
mentioned and of which the authenticity is doubtful (vide
1 Bede's Eccles. Hist., V. 23.
3 Art. on Tatwin, in Diet. of. Christ. Biog.
I Bede's Eccles. Hist., Appendix.
47
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Justus). This letter purports to have been written by
Gregory III. to the English bishops. The pope expresses
great joy on account of the arrival in Rome of Tatwin, whom
he finds to be a man of religion and of the highest integrity.
He announces the investiture of Tatwin as Archbishop of
Canterbury, and commands all the bishops and clergy of
England to be subject to him. He further appoints him
primate and guardian of the whole island of Britain, and
decrees that the church of Canterbury shall be the mother
church.4 The statements made in this letter are inconsistent
with the fact that Gregory III. soon afterwards sent the
pallium to Egbert, Bishop of York, who was of the royal house
of Northumbria.5 (vide Nothelm). It was after the reception
of the pallium that Tatwin consecrated two new bishops,
Alwig to the see of Lindsey, and Sigfrid to Selsey. The name
of Archbishop Tatwin appears attesting a charter dated
February 20, 532, by which Ethelbert II., King of Kent, who
appears to have ruled along with his brother Eadbert, grants
lands to the Abbot Dun at Limanee for the establishment of
salt mines.6 From Thomas of Elmham we learn that Tatwin
was a dear friend of Albinus, Abbot of St. Augustine's, Can-
terbury (vide Nothelm).
A book of forty enigmas written by Tatwin in Latin
hexameters is extant — one manuscript copy being preserved
in the British Museum, and another in the public library at
Cambridge. The work has also been published by Dr. Giles
in his " Anecdota Baedae." The forty enigmas are in one com-
plete series, the first and last letters of the first line of each
forming a double acrostic. Such writings were not uncommon
at this period, and seem to have occupied the lighter leisure
hours of the Anglo-Saxon monks.7 Wright considers that
Tatwin's verses though in no way remarkable, are superior
to those of his contemporary Bede. During Tatwin's epis-
copate Bede concluded his famous " Ecclesiastical History."
Tatwin died on July 30, 734, and was buried in the abbey
church of St. Augustine. His body, with those of other arch-
bishops, was transferred to the new cathedral in 1091.
4 De Gestis Pont. Ang., pp 85, 56.
s Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 735. 6 Kemble, Codex Dip., 77.
i Biog. Brit. Lit., Wright, Vol. I., p. 180.
48
io.— NOTHELM, 735 to 739.
Eadbert, King of Kent, 725 to 548.
Ethelbald, King of Mercia, 716 to 755.
Ceolwulf, King of Northumbria, 729 to 737.
The claim of Nothelm, the successor of Tatwin, to be remem-
bered by posterity rests chiefly on his connection with the
venerable Bede, who, in the preface to his "Ecclesiastical
History," makes the following statement : " My principal
authority and aid in this work was the learned and reverend
abbot Albinus, who, educated in the church of Canterbury, by
those venerable and learned men, Archbishop Theodore of
blessed memory and the Abbot Hadrian, transmitted to me
by Nothelm, the pious priest of the church of London, either
in writing or by word of mouth of the same Nothelm, all
that he thought worthy of memory that had been done in the
province of Kent or the adjacent parts by the disciples of the
blessed Pope Gregory, as he had learned the same either from
written records or the traditions of his ancestors. The same
Nothelm, afterwards going to Rome, having with leave of the
present Pope Gregory searched into the archives of the holy
Roman Church, found there some epistles of the blessed Pope
Gregory and other popes ; and returning home, by the advice
of the aforesaid most reverend father Albinus, brought them
to me to be inserted in my history."
From this statement we may infer that Nothelm had
enjoyed personal intercourse with Bede previous to setting
out for Rome. The exact date at which he went to Rome
has not been ascertained, but it was evidently during the
pontificate of Gregory II., and therefore between the years
715 and 731.
There can be little doubt that Nothelm was in some way
specially qualified for the important work of searching and
copying the papal documents, though certain errors which
appear in Bede's History have been attributed to him by
49
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Lingard, notably the statement that Augustine (q.v.) was
consecrated by Etherius, Bishop of Aries.
Nothelm addressed to Bede thirty questions on the Books
of Kings, and Bede's reply is contained in a treatise which
is still extant. Of Nothelm's early life nothing is known,
but he was certainly of English birth. At the time of his
election to the see of Canterbury, he was arch-presbyter of
the Church of St. Paul in London.1 The name of his consecrator
has not been recorded, but Dr. Stubbs suggests the proba-
bility that the ceremony was performed by Egbert of York,
who in the same year (735) received the pallium from Pope
Gregory III.
Nothelm was to some extent responsible for the erection
of York into an archbishopric, for his researches in the Roman
archives had revealed the fact that Pope Gregory the Great
had fully intended to take this step (vide Augustine). Among
Bede's minor works is preserved a long letter which he addressed
to Bishop Egbert, giving advice as to the administration
of his diocese. As a means of restoring discipline Bede urged
him to forward the scheme of Pope Gregory I. to invest the
see of York with metropolitan authority. Acting on this
advice, with the approval of the kings of Mercia and North-
umbria, Egbert applied to Rome for the pallium, which, as
already stated, he obtained from Pope Gregory III. in 735. 2
He thus became the second archbishop of York, for since
Paulinus none of his predecessors had held a higher title than
that of bishop. From Egbert's time there have been two
archiepiscopal sees in England.
After receiving the pallium from Pope Gregory III., in
736, Nothelm consecrated three bishops, namely Cuthbert
to the see of Hereford, Herewald to Sherborne, and Ethelfrith
to Elmham.3 An interesting letter addressed to Nothelm
by the English missionary Boniface (vide Brihtwald) who
had been made archbishop of Mentz, has been preserved.4
In spite of the favours heaped on him by the pope, Boniface
maintained a warm attachment to the English Church. ' ' When
1 Hist. Monast. S. Aug. Cant., by Thomas of Elmham, p. 312.
2 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 735.
3 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III. 330.
< Ibid., pp. 335-336.
50
Nothelm
I quitted my native land," he writes, "I went supported by
the prayers of your predecessor Archbishop Brihtwald,
whose memory will ever be dear to me, and in my wanderings
with my brother missionaries I would fain be associated with
you in the unity of the Catholic faith, and in the bond of
spiritual love." He begs Nothelm to send him a copy of
the questions addressed by Augustine to Gregory the Great,
with the pope's replies to the same. A document with
these questions and replies (vide Augustine) appears to have
been brought by Nothelm from Rome.
In 736 or 737, Nothelm held a council attended by nine
bishops, at which he ordered the restoration of a charter,
conveying certain lands to the Abbess Hrotwari, of the con-
vent of Withington, in Gloucestershire.5 The name of
Nothelm appears attesting a charter of Eadbert, King of
Kent, in 738. 6 Nothelm died on October 17, 739, and was
buried near his predecessors, in the abbey church of St.
Augustine, Canterbury.
Thomas of Elmham, writing of Nothelm's well-known
sanctity, indulges in the following play of words : " Eximiae
sanctitati optime convenit nomen suum. Dicitur enim
Nothelmus, quasi notus almus." Tanner, quoting from
Leland declares that Nothelm made use of materials which
he brought from Rome to write many books, and gives a list
of seven works attributed to him.7 Modern research, how-
ever, has proved that these works are supposititious.
5 Ibid. 6 Kemble, Codex. Dip., No. lxxxv.
» Bibliotheca, p. 552.
51
ii.— CUTHBERT, 740 to 758.
Eadbert, King of Kent, 725 to 748.
Ethelbald, King of Mercia, 725 to 755.
Offa, King of Mercia, 755 to 796.
From the period of the conclusion of Bede's History (734) we
are indebted to less trustworthy chronicles for the subsequent
history of the Anglo-Saxon Church. For the next hundred
years the records are in some cases so meagre and incomplete
that the successors of Augustine appear from time to time
only as dim and shadowy figures. The register of their suc-
cession has, however, been carefully and accurately kept.
A vacancy of some months in the see of Canterbury followed
the death of Nothelm. The date is variously stated by differ-
ent writers, but it was probably early in the year 740, that
Cuthbert, a Mercian of noble birth, was elected archbishop.
He had been abbot of the monastery of St. Mary at Lyminge
in Kent, from which position he was elected to the see of
Hereford in 736, through the favour of King Ethelbald of
Mercia. His taste for architecture led him to improve and
beautify the cathedral of Hereford, and to complete a magnifi-
cent wooden cross begun by his predecessor, Bishop Walstod.
Of this cross he afterwards wrote a description in Latin verse,
and caused other verses, which he had composed, to be
inscribed on a monument erected in memory of his predecessors
in the see of Hereford.1 On his translation to the see of
Canterbury, he determined for some reason not explained,
to proceed to Rome for confirmation of his election. If the
statement that he received the pallium from the hands of
Pope Gregory III. be correct, he must have reached Rome
before November 27, 741, the date of Gregory's death.
The pomp and splendour of the Roman Church made a deep
impression on Cuthbert, and he returned to England, imbued
with a profound veneration for all things Roman. Shortly
1 Will, of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Ang., p. 299.
52
Cuthbert
after his return, he held a synod at Clovesho (vide Theodore),
at which Ethelbald, King of Mercia, who then held supremacy
over Kent, was present, together with many clergy and
wise men of the kingdom. The grant known as the " Privi-
lege of Withred" (vide Brihtwald), was confirmed at this
meeting, to the churches and monasteries of Kent.3
Another synod, of which the decrees were of considerable
importance to the English Church, was convened by Cuthbert
at Clovesho, in the year 747. It was attended by eleven
bishops, many abbots and other clergy. The archbishop
opened the proceedings by reading letters from Pope Zachray,
who advised reform in certain matters of ecclesiastical dis-
cipline. A list of thirty-one decrees passed at this council
have been preserved. They are directed chiefly against the
negligence of the clergy, and the secular monasteries, which
were at that time in much need of reform. It was decreed
that the Paternoster, the Creed and the office of the Mass
should be explained in English, and that priests should not
take fees for the baptism of infants. The festivals of St.
Gregory the Great and St. Augustine were ordered to be
kept in England.3 The general result of this council was
to bring the English Church into closer union with Rome.
Certain writers, including Thomas of Elmham, declare that
this synod was held on the advice of Boniface (vide Brihtwald),
the English missionary who had been appointed papal legate
for Germany, and who had convened a similar meeting in
that country. Recent research, however, has revealed that
the German council, to which Boniface refers in a letter
addressed to Cuthbert, was held after the council at Clovesho.
From the evidence adduced, and considering Boniface's
general attitude of humility towards the English Church, it
seems more probable that he adopted the articles of the council
of Clovesho than that he dictated them.4 He appears, how-
ever, to have exercised some influence on the English churches,
through his friendship with Cuthbert and other bishops, whom
he supported in the desire for closer union with Rome.
- Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 742.
3 Will, of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Ang., p. 8.
« Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, Vol. III., p. 383.
53
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
A letter has been preserved, addressed by Boniface and the
bishops of Germany to Ethelbald, of Mercia, in which the
king is urged to repent of his profligate life. Boniface also
wrote to Egbert, Archbishop of York, thanking him for gifts
received, and begging him to urge King Ethelbald to comply
with his advice.5
In June, 755, Boniface was martyred by the Frisians, for
whose sake he had in his old age resigned his see of Mentz in
order to go among them as a simple missionary. On receiving
the news of his friend's death, Cuthbert convened a synod at
which he decreed that the anniversary of the martyrdom
of Boniface should be solemnly kept in the English churches.
Cuthbert also wrote to Lullus, the successor of Boniface in the
the see of Mentz, informing him of the decision of this synod.6
Up to this time the church of St. Augustine's monastery,
which lay outside the city walls, had remained the burial-
place of the archbishops of Canterbury, and of the kings of
Kent (vide Augustine). This privilege was much valued by
the monks of St. Augustine's, as the visits of pilgrims to the
shrines, and the miracles said to be wrought there, brought
considerable wealth and importance to the monastery. The
cathedral of Christ Church had meanwhile been regarded as
scarcely equal in dignity to the church of the monastery.
Cuthbert's interest in architecture had, however, led him
to enlarge and beautify the cathedral of Christ Church. At
the east end he erected a baptistery dedicated to St. John the
Baptist. After carrying out these improvements he deter-
mined to make the cathedral the burial place of himself
and future archbishops. Certain early writers declare, how-
ever, that when in Rome Cuthbert had obtained permission
from the Pope for him and his successors to be buried within
the cathedral of Christ Church.7
He was well aware that such an innovation would meet with
violent opposition from the monks of St. Augustine's. One of
the later historians of St. Augustine's describes Cuthbert's
scheme to deprive the monastery of its privileges as " most
deadly, serpentine and even matricidal."8
» Ibid. « Ibid.
7 Gervase of Canterbury's Chronicle, Twysden's edition, p. 1295.
8 Thorn's Chronicle, Twysden's edition, p. 1771.
54
Cuthbert
When Cuthbert felt death approaching he summoned the
clergy of the cathedral, and revealed to them his design which,
however, he advised them to keep secret. A stone coffin was
conveyed into the palace, and kept in readiness to receive
his remains.
Cuthbert died on October 28, 758, [but his death was not
made known until three days later, when the cathedral bell
tolled out its solemn knell for the departed spirit. On hearing
it, the monks of St. Augustine's, led by their abbot, came as
was their custom in slow procession, chanting litanies for the
dead, to convey the body of the archbishop to the cemetery.
But on reaching the palace they were informed that the
archbishop had been buried three days previously, in the
cathedral.9 Their rage and dismay drew shouts of triumph
from the cathedral clergy. The monks found their threats
and storming to be of no avail, and with one exception the
archbishops of Canterbury were henceforth to be buried in
Christ Church until the Norman Conquest.
9 Ibid, p. 1774.
55
12.— BREGWIN, 759 to 765.
Ethelbert II., King of Kent, 748 to 760.
Offa, King of Mercia, 755 to 796.
On the festival of St. Michael, 759, Bregwin, or Bregowine,
the son of noble parents living in Old Saxony, was consecrated
archbishop in Canterbury Cathedral. He had come to
England in his youth to study in one of the schools founded by
Archbishop Theodore and Abbot Hadrian.1
There he became a distinguished scholar and teacher,
winning respect by his blameless life, and popularity by his
courteous and conciliatory temper. On the death of Cuthbert,
he was chosen by Ethelbert, King of Kent, to fill the vacant
see, and, with the full consent of the clergy, was afterwards
unanimously elected in the presence of a large and rejoicing
crowd.2 He is said to have received the pallium from Pope
Paul 1.3
Though two eleventh century biographies of Bregwin have
been preserved, one written by Eadmer and the other by
Osbern, both monks of Canterbury, they give no particulars
of his life and acts, but consist of the usual stereotyped eulogies
concerning his learning and sanctity, and of records of miracles
wrought at his tomb. At the time of his election to the
archbishopric, Bregwin was probably already aged, and he
is said to have pleaded in vain to be excused from undertaking
the burden of so high an office. From an extant letter written
by him to Lullus, Archbishop of Mentz, it appears that the
two prelates had met in Rome, and there enjoyed friendly
intercourse.4 But at what period of his life or with what
purpose Bregwin visited Rome are unknown.
His name appears attesting certain charters of the period,
and he is recorded to have held a synod, at which complaint
1 Vita Bregwini, by Eadmer, in Anglia Sacra, p. 184.
1 Ibid. 3 Ralph de Diceto, in Anglia Sacra, p. 681.
1 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, p. 398.
56
Bregwin
was made of the unjust detention of an estate belonging to
Christchurch.5 The length of his episcopate is variously
stated by different writers, but according to the most reliable
anthorities he died on August 25, 765.
There is poetry in Eadmer's description of his death. He
tells that the last winter of the old archbishop's life was
unusually severe. Snow lay deep and all things were bound
hard in the frost, so that plants and animals died in great
numbers. " And lo ! when the winter was past, when the
rain was over and gone, when the flowers appeared on the earth,
and the time of singing of the birds was come, and the voice of the
turtle was heard in the land, and the fig-tree was putting forth
her green figs, and the vines with their tender grapes gave a
pleasant scent, even then a voice came to Bregwin, ' Come
with me from Lebanon, my spouse, come with me from
Lebanon, and receive thy crown.' And the soul of the happy
father left this mortal body, and borne by angels ascended to
the heavenly Jerusalem, where crowned with the glories pur-
chased for him by the Lord Jesus Christ, he abideth for
ever."6
Thorn declares that Bregwin in choosing the place of his
burial " followed in the vulpine footsteps of his predecessor."
Like Cuthbert (q.v.), he ordered that his death should be kept
secret until after his burial in the chapel of St. John the
Baptist, in Christ Church Cathedral. When the cathedral
bell tolled, the Augustinians, who had been on the watch, led
by their abbot Jaenbert, and accompanied by a band of armed
men, hastened to the palace to secure the body of the deceased
prelate. On discovering that they had been again outwitted
by the cathedral clergy, for Bregwin's body had already laid
in the grave for three days, their indignation knew no bounds.
Abbot Jaenbert solemnly declared that he would uphold
the rights of his monastery by an appeal to Rome, and steps
were immediately taken to carry this into effect7 (vide
Jaenbert).
Eadmer solemnly states that though Bregwin wrought no
miracles during his life, he could certainly have done so had
the necessity arisen, as is proved by those afterwards wrought
s Ibid. 6 Vita Bregwini, p. 186 (Hook's trans.)
7 Hist. Monasti S. Aug. Cant., by Thomas of Elmbam, p. 328.
57
5
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
at his tomb. In the reign of Henry I., an attempt was made,
by a monk named Lambert, to remove Bregwin's remains from
Christ Church, but was frustrated by the sudden death of
Lambert. It is not surprising to read that Archbishop
Bregwin afterwards appeared in a vision to express his
indignation at this attempted sacrilege.8
Vita, by Eadmer, p. 188.
58
i3.~ JAENBERT (or LAMBERT) 766 to 791.
Off a, King of Mercia, 755 to 796.
Cynewulf, King of Wessex, 755 to 784.
The threat of Abbot Jaenbert to uphold the rights of his
monastery by an appeal to Rome (vide Bregwin), did not fail
to produce some apprehension in the minds of the cathedral
clergy. The abbot had shown himself to be a person of
unusual capacity and resolution, who would undoubtedly
leave no stone unturned to gain his case. It was therefore
considered advisable to come to some understanding with him.
No details of how this was effected have been preserved. We
only know that the quarrel ended with the election of Jaenbert
himself to the archiepiscopal see. He was consecrated at
Canterbury, on February 2, 766. * The name of his conse-
crator has not been recorded. The ceremony may have been
performed by Egbert, Archbishop of York, who died on
November 19 of the same year. It was probably in the
year after his consecration that Jaenbert received the pallium
from Pope Paul I.
During the early part of his episcopate he appears to have
been on friendly terms with Offa, King of Mercia, who had
now gained supremacy over a great part of England, and who
was gradually effecting the subjugation of Kent. From a
charter dated 774, we learn that Offa bestowed on Jaenbert a
grant of land at Higham in Kent.*
For some reason, however, Offa began to look with suspicion
on the power wielded by Jaenbert in Kent. At this period
the archbishop enjoyed privileges in common with the
monarch, for his word, like that of the king, was received in
courts of justice as equivalent to his oath, and he had the power
to grant a nine days' grace to the offender whose life was sought
by the family of a murdered man. In all other respects he
1 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 763.
2 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 402.
59
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
was on the same footing as princes of the blood.3 He was the
ruler of great estates, which had been granted to his see, and
within which he had the right to hold courts, to try, and to
execute thieves. He also coined money, with his own name
and effigy impressed on it. Though Jaenbert is the first
archbishop of Canterbury of whose coinage specimens have
been preserved,4 the right probably belonged to archbishops
before his time.
The supremacy of Offa was deeply resented by the Kentish
nobles, and it seems highly probable that Jaenbert supported
them in their schemes for revolt. The story that he was in
correspondence with Charlemagne, whom he invited to
come to England, to restore liberty to Kent by the
overthrow of Offa is, however, founded on insufficient
evidence. But whatever may have been the real grounds
of his suspicions, Offa determined to limit the arch-
bishop's power, by taking the bold step of establishing a
new archiepiscopal see in Mercia. This measure was to some
extent justified by the fact that Mercia was at least as impor-
tant a kingdom as Northumbria, which had become possessed
of an archiepiscopal see in the year 735 (vide Nothelm). If
the Northumbrians had refused to be ruled by a Kentish
bishop, why should the Mercians submit to this indignity ?
The accounts given by different writers of Offa's proceedings
in founding the archbishopric of Lichfield, are vague and con-
tradictory. He was aware that the foundation of a new
archbishopric would be held invalid without the sanction of
the Roman see, and it is generally believed to have been in
consequence of his application to Pope Hadrian I., that in 786
or 787, two papal legates, George, Bishop of Ostria, and
Theophylact, Bishop of Todi, arrived in England.5
They came accompanied by Wighed, an ambassador of
Charlemagne, and on their way to the court of Offa visited
Jaenbert at Canterbury. What happened during their visit
has not been recorded, but as envoys from the pope they
were honourably received, not only in Kent, but in the other
parts of England whither they journeyed. After spending
3 Lingard, Hist, of the Anglo-Saxon Church, Vol. I., p. 100.
* Hawkin's Silver Coins of England, p. 102.
5 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 403.
60
Jaenbert (or Lambert)
some time at the court of King Off a, Bishop George proceeded
to Northumbria, where he was hospitably entertained by the
king and by the archbishop of York. There a synod was
held, at which certain ecclesiastical decrees, approved by the
legate, were passed.6
After the return of Bishop George to Mercia, King Offa
convened a council at a place called Cealchyth, supposed to
be Chelsea, near London, which was then held to be within the
province of Mercia.7 This council was attended by King
Offa and certain of his aldermen, the papal legates, Arch-
bishop Jaenbert, twelve bishops, and other clergy. The
decrees passed at the Northumbrian council were confirmed.
The election of a prelate named Higbert to the new archi-
episcopal see at Lichfield was then announced by King Offa.
After an angry debate, it was resolved that Higbert should
have jurisdiction over all the dioceses hitherto ruled by
Canterbury, except Rochester, London, Selsey, Winchester,
and Sherborne. Egfert the son of Offa, was then crowned
king of Kent.8 The part taken by the legates in these pro-
ceedings has not been recorded, but it is certain that after
their return to Rome, the pallium was sent by Pope Hadrian I.
to Archbishop Higbert. The report which the legates drew
up for Pope Hadrian of their proceedings in England has been
preserved, and is a document of considerable interest.9
In addition to being deprived of his jurisdiction over a
considerable part of Mercia, Jaenbert appears to have been
dispossessed of certain lands belonging to his see. At a
synod, of which the date is uncertain, he complained of injuries
done to Christ Church by the detention of an estate, granted by
Ethelbald of Mercia. As we do not hear of Jaenbert's having
taken any action for the recovery of his jurisdiction over
Mercia, we may infer that he was reluctantly forced to consent
to Offa's arrangement. Thus there were for the time being
three metropolitan sees in England. Charters exist of the year
788, attested by the archbishops of Canterbury and of Lich-
field. During this episcopate the Danes made their first
descent upon Britain. In 787 they landed with three ships
6 Ibid., p. 443. 7 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 785.
8 Ibid. 9 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 447.
6l
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
in Wessex, and killed the governor of a town, who had
endeavoured to defend the citizens.10
The date of Jaenbert's death is uncertain, but it probably
occurred on August n or 12, 791. When he felt his end
approaching, he requested that he might be carried to the
monastery of St. Augustine of which he had been abbot, and
to which he desired to restore the ancient privilege of being the
burial place of the archbishops (vide Cuthbert). He was,
however, the last Anglo-Saxon archbishop to be buried there.
10 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 787.
62
14— ETHELHEARD, 791 to 805.
Offa, King of Mercia, 755 to 796.
Egfert, King of Mercia, 796 (ruled for 141 days).
Kenulf, King of Mercia, 796 to 821. (?)
Eadbert Pren, King of Kent, 795 to 798.
Of the early history of Ethelheard or Athelard, who was
elected to the see of Canterbury in the year of his predecessor's
death, nothing is known. Simeon of Durham states that he
was abbot of Hlud, a place which cannot now be identified
with any certainty, but which was probably in Mercia. The
fact that he owed his promotion to the influence of King
Offa, shows that he was either a Mercian, or at least attached
to the Mercian interests. William of Malmesbury attempts
to identify him with a person of similar name, who was ninth
bishop of Winchester and third abbot of Malmesbury, but
no reliance can be placed on this statement1.
His consecration was delayed until July 21, 793, probably
owing to the unsettled condition of the Kentish Church. The
name of his consecrator has not been recorded. Higbert of
Lichfield, who, as we have seen had been promoted to the
dignity of an archbishop (vide Jaenbert), probably performed
the ceremony.
There is evidence that Ethelheard was regarded with
favour by Offa, of Mercia, for a letter has been preserved
addressed to him by Charles the Great, requesting him to use
his influence with the Mercian king on behalf of certain English
exiles.2 At the council of Frankfort, convened by Charles
the Great, in 794, clergy from Britain were present, though the
English Church had taken no share in the iconoclastic con-
flict, concerning which the council conferred. It was decreed
that neither worship nor adoration was to be given to the
images of saints.
In the decrees of a council, held at Clovesho (vide Theodore)
' Cf. Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 468. 2 Ibid.
63
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
in the same year, the signature of Archbishop Ethelheard
appears after that of Higbert, Archbishop of Lichfield.
On the death of Offa, in 796, the Kentish nobles, who had
revolted in the previous year against the supremacy of Mercia,
chose a king of their own named Eadbert Pren. Ethelheard,
who was attached to the Mercian interests, soon found his
position in Kent to be precarious. Fearing that he would be
put to death by the Kentish nobles, he deserted his see, and
took refuge in Mercia.
The letters of Alcuin, the most remarkable English church-
man of his age, throw much light on the history of this period.
Alcuin was by birth a Northumbrian, and had been educated
in the school of Egbert, Archbishop of York. His distin-
guished qualities had attracted the attention of Charles the
Great, who invited him to his court, and made him instructor
at the palace school, where the king himself was a pupil.
Several admonitory letters have been preserved, addressed
by Alcuin to Archbishop Ethelheard, and to the clergy and
nobles of Kent.3 In one of these Alcuin implores Ethelheard
not to desert his flock, and in another, written a year later (798),
he advises him to labour to end the schism, and to do penance
for having fled from Kent. While in Mercia, Archb shop
Ethelheard used his episcopal authority to excommunicate
Eadbert Pren, who was in holy orders, and who was declared
ineligible to the throne of Kent, on account of his tonsure.
In this the archbishop was supported by Pope Leo III.,
who confirmed the excommunication.
In the same year (798) Eadbert Pren was captured by
Kenulf , the new king of Mercia, cruelly mutilated, and carried
in chains to Mercia. On the overthrow of Pren, Ethelheard
returned to Canterbury. After the death of Offa, the arch-
bishop of Lichfield gradually lost his jurisdiction over Mercia,
and many Mercian bishops began to return their allegiance
to Ethelheard. Kenulf, King of Mercia, who desired to obtain
the support of Ethelheard and the people of Kent, decided to
restore to the see of Canterbury its original jurisd ction. He
accordingly wrote to Pope Leo III. asking permission to take
this step. The pope's reply to Kenulf is extant. In it he
explains that Pope Hadrian's division of the archbishopric
3 ibid.
64
Ethelheard
was the result of a petition from the English bishops, which Off a
had represented as unanimous. Pope Leo, however, annulled
the decree of his predecessor, and declared that the primacy
should henceforth belong entirely to Canterbury, as Pope
Gregory the Great had decreed.4
King Kenulf then restored to the see of Canterbury the
lands and property of which it had been deprived by Offa.
Certain difficulties seem to have arisen, however, in restoring
to the archbishop his former jurisdiction. On the advice of
Alcuin, Ethelheard conferred with Eanbald, Archbishop of
York, and it was decided that Ethelheard should go to Rome
to make his appeal in person to Pope Leo III. He accordingly
sent out in the year 8oi,5 accompanied by Kineberht, Bishop
of Winchester, by another bishop whose name has not been
recorded, and by two English thanes.
On receiving news that Ethelheard had set out for Rome,
Alcuin, who had been made abbot of Tours, sent a servant
with a horse and his own saddle, to meet the archbishop and
his companions at St. Joss6-sur-mer, near Etaples. In a
letter sent by Alcuin at the same time to Ethelheard, he
advises him concerning his journey, and invites him to Tours
on his return from Rome.6
The mission of Ethelheard to the papal court was attended
with complete success. After he left Rome, Pope Leo III. wrote
to Kenulf praising the character and ability of the archbishop,
and stating that he had restored the rights of the see of Canter-
bury. On his return to England, Ethelheard convened a
synod at Clovesho, in October 802, when in accordance with
the pope's decree the rights of Canterbury were fully acknow-
ledged and the metropolitan dignity was withdrawn from
Lichfield.7 The wording of the document in which the pope
confirmed the primacy to Canterbury is remarkable : " We
give this in charge, and sign it with the sign of the cross, that .
the see archiepiscopal from this time forward never be in the
monastery of Lichfield, nor in any other place but the city of
Canterbury, where Christ's Church is ; and where the Catholic
faith first shone forth in this island ; and where holy baptism
4 Ibid. s Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, sub arm. 798.
6 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 532.
■> Kemble Cod. Dip., 185.
65
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
was first administered by St. Augustine. . . . But if any
dare to rend Christ's garment and to divide the unity of the
holy Church of God contrary to the apostolical precepts and
ours, let him know that he is eternally damned, unless he
make due satisfaction for what he has wickedly done contrary
to the canon."8
Ethelheard died on May 8, 805, having enjoyed for nearly
three years full jurisdiction south of the Humber. He was
buried in Christ Church cathedral, in the chapel of St. John
the Baptist. He appears to have been a prelate of considerable
energy and resolution. The history of the period during which
he governed the see may be considered the most important in
our ecclesiastical annals between the death of Bede and the
age of Dunstan. Owing to the number of charters, letters,
and synodical decrees preserved, it is singularly well illus-
trated by documentary evidence.9
8 Wilkin's Concilia, I. 166 (Hook's translation).
9 Cf. Art. on Ethelheard, by Stubbs, in Diet, of Christ. Biog.
66
I5-— WULFRED, 805 to 832.
Kenulf, King of Mercia, 796 to 821. (?)
Ceolwulf, King of Mercia, 822 to 824.
Beornwulf, King of Mercia, 824 to 826.
Egbert, King of Wessex, 800 to 839.
Of the early history of Wulfred, who succeeded Ethelheard
in the see of Canterbury, nothing is known except that he had
been archdeacon under his predecessor. Some writers
suppose that the archdeaconry of Canterbury, of which there
is no previous mention, was instituted by Ethelheard, and
that Wulfred was the first to hold this important office. He
was most probably a Kentish man, for extant charters show
that he owned much property in Kent. His consecration
appears to have taken place early in August, 805, when a
synod was sitting at Acle or Oakley, a place supposed
to have been about two miles from Canterbury. He was
probably consecrated by the assembled bishops, who would go
to Canterbury for the ceremony.
In the following year he received the pallium from Rome.
According to some accounts he went to Rome to receive
it, but this seems on the whole improbable.1 There is
evidence that he wielded considerable power in Kent, and was
attached to the Kentish interests. Specimens of his coins
which have been preserved, show that they were not like those
of his predecessor, stamped on the reverse with the name
of the Mercian king, but had only the inscription " Dorobernia
Civitas," and the name of the moneyer.
In the year 807 Cuthred, who had ruled Kent as viceroy of
Mercia, died, and after his death the relations of Wulfred
with the Mercian king appear to have become strained. In
a letter written by Pope Leo III. to Charles the Great in 808,
he remarks on the disagreement which had arisen between
Kenulf and the archbishop.2 During the next few years,
■ Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 559. 2 Ibid.
67
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
however, they appear to have kept up an appearance of
friendliness on the public occasions on which they met, and
business referring to certain grants of sales of land was trans-
acted between them. At a Witenagemot held at London in
811, Kenulf sold land in West Kent to Archbishop Wulfred
for 126 mancuses.3
In 814 Wulfred, in company with Wigbert, Bishop of
Sherborne, set out for Rome "pro negotiis Anglicanae
Ecclesise." It is generally supposed that the visit had
reference to his disagreement with Kenulf, concerning which
he desired to consult Pope Leo III. After his return his
relations with the Mercian king appear for a time to have been
more friendly.
In 816 an important council was held at Cealchyth or
Chelsea (vide Jaenbert), at which Wulfred and Kenulf were
present, together with all the bishops and aldermen of the
southern province. Eleven canons of discipline were passed.
Of these the first contained a declaration of the Christian faith,
and the third ordered a stricter observance of the law of
charity. The others referred chiefly to matters of ecclesias-
tical discipline.4
It was shortly after this meeting that the final rupture
took place between Kenulf and the archbishop. Its im-
mediate cause was the seizure by Kenulf of the Kentish
monasteries of South Minster and Reculver in Thanet. The
grounds on which Kenulf based his claim to these monasteries
are not stated. The archbishop indignantly resisted the king
when he attempted to take possession of the revenues of the
monasteries, and Kenulf in revenge is said to have brought
false charges against him before the pope. A contemporary
chronicle declares that in consequence of the quarrel " the whole
English nation was deprived of primordial authority, and of
the ministry of holy baptism for six years."5 Some writers
have supposed this to mean that the pope placed England
under an interdict. More probably, however, it simply implies
that through the enmity of the Mercian king, Wulfred was for
six years much hindered in the exercise of his episcopal functions.
Once during these years, Kenulf attempted at a council
held at London to extort from the archbishop more lands and
3 Ibid. « Ibid. s ibid.
68
Wulfred
payments on condition of making peace between him and the
pope. To this Wulfred consented, but was again deceived
by Kenulf , who retained for three years more the revenues of
South Minster and Reculver.
On the death of Kenulf, the estates which he had seized
passed to his daughter, the abbess Cwenthritha. After pro-
longed litigation and discussion of the case at several councils,
Cwenthritha agreed to accept four estates as full compensation
for her claims, and a general reconciliation followed. The
name of Wu>fred is found in a large number of charters,
several of which show that he granted lands to the see of
Canterbury. In 813 he caused Christ Church to be restored,
and in the same year granted a privilege to the cathedral
clergy by which they might have and enjoy the houses which
they had constructed by their own labour, with the right to
bequeath them at will to inmates of the monastery, on con-
dition that they continued to use the dormitory and refectory
according to rule.6
In the last charter of Wulfred, he grants for the good of his
soul a part of his inherited property of Sheldford near Eastry,
to be held after his death by the devout family of Christ
Church, on condition that they commemorate him with alms
and masses, and keep unchanged all his acts, while doing their
best to improve on what he has done for good.7 A charter
of Wernherd, the nephew of Wulfred, is also extant, in which,
before his death, he restores to the cathedral monastery the
lands held by the archbishop's gift. This charter states
that Wulfred ordered masses to be said daily for all the
benefactors of the monastery, and left a dole of bread and
cheese, or bacon and a penny, for 1,200 poor people on his
anniversary.8
The document known as the will of Wulfred is witnessed
by his successor, and would hence appear to have been drawn
up after his death, though the signatures may have been added
later in order to confirm it.9
During this episcopate Egbert, King of Wessex, gradually
gained the supremacy over all England, and assumed the title
of Bretwalda. In 827, Mercia fell entirely into his power,
6 Ibid. 7 Kemble, Cod. Dip., ccxxv.
8 Ibid., ccxxiv. ' Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 577.
69
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and he was also acknowledged as overlord of Northumbria.
Archbishop Wulfred probably welcomed the strong rule of
the West Saxon king, for he appears to have been on friendly
terms with both Egbert and his son Ethelwulf.
Wulfred died on March 24, 832, and was buried in the
cathedral of Christ Church. He appears to have been a
prelate of excellent business capacity and an able politician.
70
i6.— FEOLOGELD (or THEOLOGILD), 832.
The shadowy figure of Feologeld, the successor of Wulfred,
appears next on the page of history. As abbot of a Kentish
monastery, Feologeld had attested many charters in the
time of Ethelheard and Wulfred from 803 onwards. He
was elected to the see of Canterbury, on April 25, 832,
one month after the death of his predecessor, and was con-
secrated on June 9.
Concerning him or his acts nothing is recorded. We only
know that he died on August 30, having ruled the see of
Canterbury only three months.1 The cause of his death is
unknown.
Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontificum, II. 348.
71
17.— CEOLNOTH, 833 (?) to 870.
Egbert, King of Wessex, 827 to 839 (first overlord of all England).
Ethelwulf, King of Wessex, 839 to 858.
Ethelbald, King of Wessex, 858 to 860.
Ethelbert. King of Wessex, 860 to 866.
Ethelred I., King of Wessex, 866 to 871.
Ceolnoth, who succeeded Feologeld in the see of Canterbury,
is believed, on slight evidence, to have been a West Saxon,
and to have owed his appointment to Egbert of Wessex.
The date of his promotion is variously given by different
writers. According to Gervase of Canterbury, he was
elected on June 29, and consecrated on August 27, 833,
but the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" places his ordination in
the year 830.
It is to be noted that in the best modern authorities, the
chronology followed by the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle," and
Florence of Worcester has been altered two years at this
period, in order to harmonize with the undisputed dates of
documents and other certain authorities.
Ceolnoth is said to have been dean of Canterbury, and the
statement, if correct, gives us the first mention of that office
in the English Church. It is possible, however, that he
has been confused with Archbishop Ethelnoth, who bore the
title in the eleventh century.1 In the year after his con-
secration, Ceolnoth received the pallium from Rome.
One version of the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" states that
at the election of Ceolnoth, Christ Church, Canterbury, had
been visited by a grievous sickness, which carried off all the
monks except five. Being unable to find others to replace
them, he was forced to admit secular clerks into the monastery.
Doubt has been cast on this statement by modern writers,
who suppose that the story was invented at a later period
to explain the presence of secular clerks in the monasteries.
1 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 610.
72
Ceolnoth
In 838 an important council was held at Kingston under
Egbert of Wessex and his son Ethelwulf. At this meeting
a perpetual treaty of reconciliation and alliance was made
between the see of Canterbury and the West Saxon kings.
Ceolwulf obtained the restoration of certain lands at Mailing
to the church at Canterbury. After the accession of Ethel-
wulf this agreement was confirmed by a council of bishops,
held at a place called " Astran," in 839. 2
In 857, the Danes seized Canterbury and London, and in
865 a Danish army wintered in Thanet.3 Dean Hook supposes
that Ceolnoth induced the Danes to spare Christ Church and
the monastery of St. Augustine by coining all the gold and
silver in his possession, and giving it to the invaders as a
bribe. This he infers from the fact that Ceolnoth was distin-
guished for the quantity of money he coined, more specimens
of his coins being extant than of any other Anglo-Saxon
primate.
During this episcopate King Ethelwulf granted certain
famous charters by which he bestowed great benefactions
on the Church. These grants have been claimed to represent
an endowment of the Church by the State. Modern
research has, however, proved conclusively that the Anglo-
Saxon king was only a landowner among many others, and
Ethelwulf could not therefore have given what was not his
to bestow. He appears to have made three separate grants
at different times. By the first he released from all taxes
except the " trinoda necessitas,"4 a tenth of the enfranchised
lands, whether in the tenancy of the Church or of his t anes.
Secondly he granted a tenth part of his own private estates
to various thanes or to Church establishments. Thirdly, he
commanded that on every ten hides of his own land, one poor
man, whether native or stranger, should be maintained in
food and clothing.
It is clear that none of these grants can be taken to repre-
sent a gift of the tithe. He appears to have used the tithe
chiefly as a convenient measure for his benefactions to churches
and to various charities . The idea that the clergy had a certain
claim to the tithe of increase is derived from the customs of
2 Ibid. 3 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
4 Army service, the repair of strongholds, and the repair of bridges.
73
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the Levitical priesthood, but there is no evidence that it was
ever enforced in England in Anglo-Saxon times.5
The name of Ceolnoth appears, attesting over thirty char-
ters and other documents of this period.6 Asser7 states that
he died in 870, the same year in which King Edmund of East
Anglia was martyred by the Danes. He was buried in the
cathedral of Christ Church.
The famous St. Swithin, Bishop of Winchester, is recorded
to have made his profession of obedience to Ceolnoth in 852.
5 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 636.
6 Kemble, Codex. Dip., Vols. I. and II.
1 Life of King A If red.
74
i8.— ETHELRED (or ATHELRED), 870 to 889.
English Kings : Ethelred I, King of Wessex, 866 to 871.
Alfred the Great, 871 to 901.
With the reign of Alfred the Great we reach the most eventful
and stirring period in Anglo-Saxon history. The part played
by the archbishops of Canterbury at this time is, however,
obscured, partly on account of the many great events which
had to be recorded, and partly because their power counted
for little during the Danish wars. All the information we
can gather concerning the early history of Ethelred, the
successor of Ceolnoth, is that he had been a monk of Canter-
bury, and afterwards bishop of Wiltshire.1 But even these
statements are open to doubt, being found in a late insertion
in the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle."
The same passage states that Ethelred, on coming to Canter-
bury, desired to dismiss the secular clergy whom he found
in the monasteries (vide Ceolnoth), but he was forced to
postpone doing so on account of the disturbed condition of the
country, and the frequent battles with the Danes. He is
said to have journeyed to Rome, to receive the pallium from
Pope Hadrian II. Evidently it had now become the custom
for archbishops of Canterbury to make this journey after their
election.
One writer states that Ethelred consecrated two Welsh
bishops, one to the see of St. David's and the other to Llandaff.2
This statement is probably correct, for the princes of South
Wales acknowledged King Alfred as their overlord, and Asser,
his intimate friend and biographer, was a Welsh bishop.
The news of eight great battles fought in succession against
the Danes must have reached Canterbury soon after Ethelred's
consecration. Then came the dark months during which the
heroic king, a fugitive from his throne, was forced to seek a
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 780.
2 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, I., 207.
75
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
hiding place in the marshes of Athelney, while his people
believed him to be dead or fled over the seas. The great
victory of Ethandune (878), which placed Alfred again upon the
throne, was followed by the baptism of Guthrum, the Danish
leader, and of the chiefs of his army. The ceremony took place
at Aller in Somerset, and it is highly probable that Archbishop
Ethelred assisted. He would almost certainly witness the
famous treaty afterwards signed at Wedmore between Alfred
and the Danish leader.
In the years of peace that followed, Alfred laboured to
restore the Christian religion and the love of learning in
England. During the Danish wars, many districts had fallen
under the influence of paganism, while the influence of the
Church was everywhere weakened and in some places had
entirely ceased to exist.
The great monasteries which had been the centres of
Christian life and learning were well-nigh all destroyed. In
the few dioceses which had not disappeared, the bishops were
men of scanty learning. With undaunted courage, the great
king set himself to the work of restoration. He restored
learning in the Church in Wessex by inviting scholars to
come from Mercia, Wales, and even from the continent. He re-
built the ruined monasteries and established schools. For the
young nobles, he founded a court school similar to that which
had been established by Charlemagne. To replace the
libraries destroyed by the Danes he collected books at
Winchester and translated many famous Latin works into
English, for the use of his people. By his elaborate code of
laws, the Church was guided and governed, and the whole
conception of the work of her ministers raised.
Alfred had found his people ignorant, dejected and a prey
to heathen enemies. He left them enlightened, delivered,
inspired with courage and hope, and struggling upward on a
path of progress from which they have never since wholly
turned back. " When Alfred died," says Dean Spence, " the
Church of England had once more risen from its ruins ; it had
won the respect of foreign nations, and was playing an impor-
tant and most influential part in the life and hopes of English-
men."*
3 Cf. Spence's Hist, oj the Church oj England, I., 391.
76
Ethelred
There is little doubt that Ethelred had the honour and privi-
lege of assisting the noble-hearted king in carrying out his
great designs. The archbishop's name appears attesting the
famous document known as Alfred's will, which was first
drawn up about the year 885. In 883, Alfred sent embassies
with gifts to the Christian churches in Rome and in India.
Archbishop Ethelred died on June 30, 889.
77
ig— PLEGMUND, 890 to 914.
English Kings : Alfred the Great, 871 to 901.
Edward, the Elder, 901 to 925.
The death of Archbishop Ethelred was followed by a vacancy
of some months in the see of Canterbury. King Alfred is
said to have desired to promote to the archbishopric the famous
scholar Grimbald, who had been a monk of St. Bertin in France,
but he declined the honour. The king's choice then fell on
Plegmund, who had lived for some years as a hermit on a
remote island in Cheshire.
The parish of Plegmundham or Plemstol, about five miles
from Chester, is held to have derived its name from this
famous hermit.1 At that time the district consisted of an
island or marsh land, which is said to have been given by King
Ethelwulf to Christ Church, Canterbury. In that lonely spot,
surrounded by swamps and stagnant waters, Plegmund, a
native of Mercia, who had been driven from his monastery
by the Danes, took up his abode. There safe from intrusion
he was free to indulge his love for theological study. At
what date he left this retreat we are not informed. Asser
describes him as a venerable man, endowed with wisdom, and
says that he was one of the Mercian scholars whom Alfred
invited to his court (vide Ethelred). It therefore seems
probable that he resided for some time in Wessex before his
appointment to the archbishopric.
An attempt has been made to show that Plegmund was the
compiler of the early part of the " Saxon Chronicle," or at least
of so much of it as was written by King Alfred's direction,
previous to the year 891. The MS. supposed to have been
written by Plegmund is now in the library of Corpus Christ i
College, Cambridge.8 The only evidence in support of this
1 Gervase of Canterbury's Actus Pontificum, II., 350.
2 Wright's Biog. Brit. Lit., I., 135.
78
Plegmund
supposition is that the MS. is written in the Mercian dialect,
and that there is a change of handwriting in the year 891.
After his election, Plegmund journeyed to Rome, and was
consecrated by Pope Formosus, from whom he also received
the pallium. In King Alfred's well-known preface to Pope
Gregory's " Regula Pastoralis," he refers to Plegmund as
" my archbishop," and acknowledges his help in the trans-
lation of the work. A copy of the translation was sent by
King Alfred to all the bishops in his kingdom. The copy sent
to Plegmund is preserved, though in a much damaged state,
in the British Museum.
After the death of Alfred in 901, Plegmund crowned his
successor, Edward the Elder, at Kingston. William of Malmes-
bury states that in the third year of King Edward's reign,
Pope Formosus sent a bull of excommunication to England
because for seven years the West Saxon sees had been without
bishops. On receiving this document, Edward convened a
Witenagemot at which the bull was read by Archbishop
Plegmund. It was decided, in order to conciliate His Holi-
ness, not only to fill up the three vacant sees, but to erect three
new ones in the country of the West Saxons. Plegmund then
journeyed to Rome to present this resolution to the pope, who
was much gratified by the deference shown to his authority,
and willingly withdrew the excommunication. On his return
to England in 909, Plegmund consecrated seven bishops in
one day, five for Wessex, and the other two for Selsey in
Sussex and Dorchester in Mercia. The names of the seven
bishops are given.3 This story is considered improbable on
account of its anachronisms, for Pope Formosus died in 896,
and there are errors in the list of bishops. Several writers,
however, refer to Plegmund's second journey to Rome in
908, when he took with him offerings from the king and the
people of England to the apostolic see. There is no reason
to doubt that after his return he may have consecrated seven
bishops in one day.
A more probable motive for his second visit to Rome, may,
however, be suggested than that stated by William of Malmes-
bury. There existed in the year 896 a party in Rome imbued
with a deep and deadly animosity towards the deceased Pope
-1 De Gestis Regum Ang., II. 129.
79
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Formosus. Pope Stephen VI., his successor, ordered the dead
body of the pope to be exhumed after it had lain in the grave
for at least nine months, in order that it might be solemnly
judged before an ecclesiastical council. The corpse, dressed
in the pontifical vestments, was placed on a throne, and a
deacon was appointed to act as counsel for the defence. After
a mock-trial Pope Stephen ordered the body to be stripped
of its sacred vestments. The three fingers of the right hand,
with which popes are wont to bestow the benediction, were
cut off, and the body was thrown into the Tiber.4 It was
also decreed that all the ordinations made by Pope Formosus
should be considered invalid.
It is therefore quite probable that Archbishop Plegmund,
desiring to have his consecration confirmed by a true and
lawful pope, journeyed to Rome for this purpose in the time
of Pope Sergius III. On his return, Plegmund brought with
him to England the relics of the holy martyr St. Blaise,
which he had bought for a large sum of money, and caused
them to be deposited in the cathedral at Canterbury.5
The abbey of New Minster, which had been founded by
King Alfred at Winchester, was completed by his son Edward
in 908, and was consecrated by Plegmund.
Plegmund died in extreme old age on August 2, 914,
and was buried in his cathedral church.
* A. E. McKilliam, A Chronicle of the Popes, p. 181.
5 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontiftcum, II., 350.
80
20. — ATHELM, 914 to 923.
English King : Edward the Elder, 901 to 925.
In the list of seven bishops said to have been ordained in one
day by Plegmund (q. v.), appears the name of Athelm, who
was consecrated first bishop of Wells. He is said to have been
previously a monk of Glastonbury. Athelm belonged to a
noble West Saxon family, being the brother of Hoerstan, the
father of Dunstan (q. v.). Through the favour of King
Edward the Elder, he was translated in 914 to the see of
Canterbury, and received the pallium from Pope John X.1
Some confusion seems to have arisen between him and his
successor, Wulfhelm, for he is said to have crowned King
Athelstan at Kingston. The coronation of Athelstan did
not, however, take place until after the death of Athelm.
To this confusion is evidently due the statement that his
nephew Dunstan resided with him for some time at Canterbury
and was by him introduced to the notice of King Athelstan.2
It is certain that Athelm died in the year 923, and according
to the majority of writers Dunstan was not born until the
following year.
After his translation to Canterbury, Athelm consecrated
Wulfhelm (q. v.), his successor in the see of Wells. Though
Athelm occupied the metropolitan see for nine years, nothing
is known of his acts. He died on January 8, 923.
Anglia Sacra., I., 99.
Vita Sancti Dunstani, by Adelard (Rolls series), p. 55.
8l
2i.— WULFHELM, 923 to 942.
English Kings : Edward the Elder, 901 to 925.
Athelstan, 925 to 940.
Wulfhelm, who had succeded Athelm (q. v.) as bishop of
Wells, was on the death of the latter chosen to be his successor
also in the see of Canterbury. Concerning his early life
nothing is recorded. In the year 925 he crowned Athelstan
King of England. The ceremony took place at Kingston-on-
Thames,1 and was celebrated with unusual magnificence.
Athelstan was the illegitimate son of Edward the Elder,
by a woman of humble birth. Though he had been unani-
mously elected king by the Witan at Winchester, the necessity
for his recognition by the people may have made a splendid
public coronation advisable,2 especially as a rival had already
appeared in the person of his cousin, Elfred, son of Ethelred I.
A Latin MS. of the Gospels, on which the ancient kings of
England took their coronation oaths, and which is said to have
been the property of King Athelstan, is still preserved in the
British Museum.3
Before setting out for Rome to receive the pallium from
Pope John X.,4 Wulfhelm is said to have officiated at the
marriage of Edith, sister of Athelstan, to Hugh, Count of
Paris, the son of Robert I. Concerning Wulfhelm's sojourn
in Rome nothing is recorded. The Roman Church was then
passing through the period known in history as the "Night of
the Papacy," during which a succession of profligate prelates
occupied the papal chair. It is remarkable in comparing the
records of our Church with the Roman or other continental
Churches at the same period, that against the character of the
archbishops of Canterbury history brings not the shadow of
a charge.
1 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 924.
2 Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, I., 338.
* Ibid. 1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 927.
82
Wulfhelm
During Wulfstan's episcopate Athelstan published at
Grateley, in Hampshire, a code of ecclesiastical laws, which
has been preserved. They relate to tithes, the trial by ordeal,
and the penalties to be imposed upon false coiners. The
code commences as follows : " I, Athelstan, by the advice of
Wulfhelm my archbishop, and other my bishops, command
all my reeves in the name of the Lord and His saints, that they
do in the first place give tithes of all my estate, both of the
like stock and of the fruits of the earth, and that all the bishops
do the same in all that belongs to them, as also my aldermen
and reeves."
At this time, strict laws were enforced with regard to the
coinage. Though the archbishops were still permitted to have
a mint, they could coin money only at Canterbury, and were
not permitted to have it stamped with their effigies.
Wulfhelm died on February 12, 942, and was buried in
St. John's Chapel, in Canterbury Cathedral.
83
22. — ODO, 942 to 959. S.
English Kings : Athelstan, 925 to 940.
Edmund I., 940 to 946.
Edred, 946 to 955.
Edwy, 955 to 959-
From the outset of his career romance hovers around the figure
of Odo the Dane. That the son of a pagan, who belonged to
the hated race of Northmen, the cruel enemies of England,
should at this period have been deemed worthy to fill the chair
of St. Augustine, is a fact sufficient to arouse unusual interest.
His father is said to have been a Danish sea-robber, and to
have accompanied the army of Hingwar the Dane, who
conquered the north of England in 867. He afterwards
settled with others of his race in Northumbria or East
Anglia.2
It is probable that Odo was born in England, though the
year of his birth has not been recorded. When still a youth
he was attracted by the preaching of a Christian missionary,
and began to attend mass in spite of the opposition of his
father, who beat him unmercifully. But the boy, " exulting
in the Lord, rejoiced that he was found worthy to suffer for
His sake." He was at length disinherited and turned out of
his father's house.
Odo found a protector in Athelm, one of King Alfred's
nobles, who adopted him, caused him to be baptized, and
provided him with an excellent education. He made rapid
progress in Latin and Greek, and in the knowledge of divine
things.2 At the desire of his patron, though with some
reluctance on his own part, he was admitted to the priesthood.
About the year 887, Athelm obtained King Alfred's per-
mission to visit Rome, and was commissioned by the king to
deliver certain offerings to the pope. He accordingly set
1 Vita Odonis, by Eadmer, in Anglia Sacra., p. 78-81.
* Ibid.
84
Odo
out, accompanied by Odo, and by a great train of followers.
On the way he was stricken with a fever, and became seriously
ill. When the whole party had been delayed for some days on
account of his illness, Athelm ordered the others to proceed on
their journey, but retained Odo with him.
The young priest nursed his benefactor with loving and un-
wearied devotion. On a certain night when the fever was at
its height, and the soul of the good alderman seemed about to
depart, Odo knelt in prayer, earnestly beseeching God to
spare the life of his friend. He then administered to the
sick man a cup of consecrated wine. To this medicine
Athelm's recovery is said to have been due, and he afterwards
believed that Odo had wrought a miracle.3 After his recovery
the two proceeded to Rome, where they were honourably
received by the pope. They visited the holy places of the
city, and afterwards returned to England together.
After the death of Athelm, which seems to have occurred
soon after his return to England, Odo obtained the favour of
King Athelstan and, about the year 927 was made bishop
of Ramsbury, in Wiltshire.4 This small diocese merged into
that of Salisbury in the eleventh century.
In 936, when the French recalled to the throne Louis
d'Outremer, the nephew of Athelstan, who had been brought
up in England, the king sent him to France, under the care
of Odo, Bishop of Ramsbury. In the following year Odo
accompanied King Athelstan to the battle of Brunanburh.
There can be little doubt that the bishop of Ramsbury, who
was at heart more of a warrior than a priest, fought in that
famous battle. William of Malmesbury attempts to prove that
in the year 937 Odo had not yet taken orders but this
seems on the whole improbable. During a skirmish with the
enemy, on the eve of the battle, the king's sword suddenly
broke at the hilt. Odo, seeing the king unarmed, rushed to
his assistance, and, snatching up another sword, placed it in his
sovereign's hand. A legend declares that Odo, hearing the
king' s cry for help, approached him in the midst of the fight,
and asked what he required. On learning that his sword was
broken, the bishop pointed to the king's side. And lo !
3 ibid.
•» Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontificum (Rolls Series) II., 351, note.
85
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Athelstan saw his own good sword hanging there unbroken.
Thus encouraged in the Lord, Athelstan fought valiantly, and
on the following day the battle ended in a great victory for
the West Saxons.5
On the death of Archbishop Wulfhelm, in 942, King
Edmund, who had succeeded his brother Athelstan, acting
probably on the advice of Dunstan (q. v.), proposed to trans-
late Odo to the archbishopric of Canterbury. Odo declined the
honour, declaring that none but a monk should be made arch-
bishop, for thus had Pope Gregory the Great and St. Augustine
decreed. The king, clergy and people were unable to move
him from this decision. At length, however, he yielded to
their entreaties, and either went himself to the famous
Benedictine monastery of Fleury in France, or according to
another account, sent messengers to invite the abbot of Fleury
to come to England.6 Among the stricter clerical party in
the English Church, the idea was now gaining ground that no
monk was worthy of the name except a Benedictine, and at
this time no Benedictine monastery existed in England.
In due time, the abbot of Fleury clothed Odo in the habit
of a monk, and amid great rejoicing, he was afterwards
appointed archbishop of Canterbury. He received the
pallium from Agapetus II., who became pope in 946. Odo
found the cathedral of Christ Church in a state of dilapidation,
partly owing to neglect, and partly to the Danish wars. One
of his first works was to cause the old roof to be stripped off,
a higher one laid on, and the whole re-covered with lead. The
massive piers were also strengthened. These repairs occupied
three years, during which time, according to an ancient legend,
no rain fell within the cathedral, so that the services were
conducted as usual. To the restored edifice the archbishop
attracted large crowds of worshippers by his eloquent
preaching.7
About the year 950, Odo accompanied King Edred on his
expedition against the Danes of Northumbria, when the
monastery and town of Ripon were destroyed. The arch-
bishop does not appear to have taken any active part in the
I Vita Sancti Oswaldi, by Eadmer (Rolls series), p. 3.
6 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Aug., p. 20.
1 Vita, by Eadmer.
86
Odo
campaign. On his return to Canterbury, he brought with
him the bones of the famous Wilfrid, Archbishop of York.
The historians of York declare, however, that the bones which
Odo transported to Canterbury, were those of Wilfrid II.,
and that the remains of Wilfrid I. were never removed from
Ripon. At Odo's request, Frithegode, a learned monk of
Canterbury, wrote a metrical life of Wilfrid, which is still
extant, with a preface written by Odo himself.
Among the bishops consecrated by Odo was the illustrious
Dunstan, his successor, who was appointed to the see of
Worcester in 958. Odo also crowned King Edred, and his
successor King Edwy. The story of the unfortunate sequel
to Edwy's coronation feast is related in the life of Dunstan
(q. v.). In 958, Odo pronounced sentence of divorce between
King Edwy and Elgifu on the ground that their relationship
was within the forbidden degrees.8
It is probable that he had another motive for his action,
inasmuch as Elgifu and her mother had used their influence
against the Benedictine party in the English Church. The
young queen was taken from her husband, and banished to
Ireland. The story that Odo caused her face to be branded
with a red hot iron, and that after her attempted escape
he ordered the sinews of her legs to be cut is unworthy of
credit. There is no doubt, however, that Odo's Danish blood
showed itself in the harsh and stern manner in which he
carried out his monastic reforms, and in the little regard he
showed to the misery he inflicted on the secular and married
clergy. With Dunstan, whose influence was very great, if
not paramount, during the time of Odo's rule at Canterbury,
the Danish prelate was in full accord.
A code of ecclesiastical constitutions drawn up by Odo
has been preserved. The first part deals with the subject
of taxes, which the archbishop declares ought not to be
imposed upon the Church of God. In the second part he
admonishes kings, princes and all in authority to be
obedient to the archbishop and all other bishops, reminding
these worldly rulers that to the bishops belong the keys of
the kingdom of heaven, and the power of binding and loosing.
In the third part, he calls on the clergy to set a good example,
8 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
87
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and on the monks to be faithful to their vows, humble,
obedient, and constant in prayer.9 Odo also published certain
laws respecting marriage, and the right of widows to their
deceased husband's property.10
From a life of Oswald, Archbishop of York, written by
Eadmer, in the eleventh century, we learn many particulars
concerning Odo. Oswald on his father's side was the nephew
of Odo, and was therefore of Danish birth. He was brought up
by his uncle, who appointed the learned monk Frithegode to
be his tutor. Oswald was made a canon of Winchester, and
later, dean. Being much troubled on account of the laxity
of morals among the cathedral clergy, he sought the advice of
his uncle, and revealed to him his desire to become a
monk. At this Odo was overjoyed and advised him to go
to Fleury to study. He accordingly went to France,
and remained in the famous monastery for some years.
In 959, when Odo felt his end approaching, he sent a
message to Fleury, asking his nephew Oswald to come to him,
Oswald set out, but, on landing in England, was met by
messengers with the news of his uncle's death.
Odo died on June 2, 959. He was buried on the south side
of the altar in the cathedral church, in a tomb that was built
in the shape of a pyramid. Lanfranc (q. v.) translated his
remains to the chapel of the Holy Trinity, and in 1180, they
were placed beneath the feretory of St. Dunstan.
" The part played by Odo," says Bishop Stubbs, " in the
government of the country has been obscured by the glory of
the younger men, and by the fact that his life was not written
until a century and a half after his death. It is, however.,
certain that he did nothing to thwart the policy of Dunstan,
and enough of his ecclesiastical legislation remains to show that
in a determination to enforce the observance of both monastic
vows and the laws of marriage he came in no degree behind
his more famous successor.""
9 Wilkin's Concilia, I., 212-214. I0 Ibid., 216.
" Memorials oj St. Dunstan, Introd. lxxxvii.
23 — DUNSTAN, 940 to 988. S.
English Kings : Athelstan, 925.
Edmund L, 940.
Eadred, 946.
Edwy, 955.
Edgar, 959.
Edward the Martyr, 975.
Ethelred II., the Unready, 979.
To few places in England has historical interest been attached,
for different reasons, throughout so many generations, as to
Glastonbury in Somerset. The town lies in the midst of
orchards and water-meadows, reclaimed from the fens which
encircled Glastonbury Tor, a conical height, once an island,
but now with the surrounding flats a peninsula washed on
three sides by the river Brue.
According to a legend preserved by William of Malmesbury,
Joseph of Arimathaea was sent to Britain by St. Philip, and,
having been granted a small island in Somersetshire, there
constructed with twisted twigs the first Christian church in
Britain. On the site of this church, dedicated to the Virgin
Mary, was to rise many centuries later the famous abbey of
Glastonbury,1 The legend also relates that Joseph's staff
planted in the ground became a thorn, flowering twice a year.
The famous plant known as the Glastonbury thorn is still
found in some parts of the country.
From the clearness of the water with which the island was
surrounded, it is said to have derived its name of Glassy Isle.
By the Romans it was called Avalonia, a name supposed to be
derived from a Welsh word meaning " apple," in which fruit
it abounded. Tradition declared it to have been the burial
place of the great British King Arthur.
Later, the place became a favourite resort of Irish pilgrims,
for it was believed, probably erroneously, to be the burial
' Dugdale's Monasticon Anglicanum, Vol. I., p. 1.
89
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
place of many Irish saints, including St. Patrick the younger.
Irish scholars also took up their abode there, and built a
school. To this ancient town of Glastonbury, hallowed
by so many holy traditions, our present interest is attached
by its being the birth-place of the famous prelate whose
history we are about to relate.
The date of Dunstan's birth is uncertain, but it probably
took place somewhat earlier than 925, the year usually assigned
to it.2 He was the son of noble parents, Hoerstan and
Cynsthryth, both closely connected with the royal house of
Wessex. Hoerstan's estates, which were of considerable extent,
lay in the valley of Glastonbury.
A mass of legend, carefully preserved by the monkish
chroniclers of the middle ages, has gathered round the early
history of Dunstan. One old legend relates that, shortly
before his birth, his parents were in the church of St. Mary the
Virgin on the festival of Candlemas, so called because all
who attended walked in procession after the service carrying
lighted candles. During this procession the lights and tapers
were suddenly extinguished, and the church, though it was
midday, was plunged in darkness. But shortly afterwards,
a heavenly fire descended and rekindled the taper in
Cynsthryth's hand, thus miraculously foreshowing that
through her a great light should be born into the world.3
The childhood of Dunstan was passed with his brothers
in his father's hall. The boy grew up fair and fragile and of
diminutive stature. He was of a highly nervous and excitable
temperament and passionately fond of music. To the
legendary lore and romantic associations of his birthplace,
which must have excited his youthful imagination, he
probably owed his love of poetry. When still very young,
he was committed by his father to the care of the Irish
monks who then occupied Glastonbury. In their school he
soon became distinguished as a scholar of unusual ability.
He seems to have excelled in a variety of subjects, including
profane and sacred literature, astronomy, drawing and music.
Several beautiful ecclesiastical ornaments and illuminated
- Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
3 Vita S. Dunstani, Auctore Osberno, chap. 4, Stubbs' edition, (Rolls
series).
90
Dunstan
books, said to be his handiwork, were long preserved at
Glastonbury Abbey.
Dunstan's intense ardour for study, which was encouraged
by his parents and teachers, proved too much for his delicate
frame and excitable temperament, and resulted in a brain
fever which very nearly ended fatally. One night, in the
height of his delirium, he eluded the vigilance of his nurses,
and, rising from his bed, ran to the church. The doors were
closed, but he found means of access, probably through a
window, reached by scaffolding erected by some workmen
who had been repairing the building. Next morning he
was found sound asleep in the aisle of the church. How he
got there he could not tell, and his friends attributed this, as
well as his marvellous recovery which followed, to a miracle.4
The fame of Dunstan's learning having reached the court,
he was summoned thither to become the companion of Edmund
and Edred, King Athelstan's young step-brothers. Dunstan
appears to have been extremely unpopular with the other
young nobles, who may have been envious of his unusual gifts,
and of the wonderful favour which his accomplishments
secured him among the fair sex. He was accused to the king
of studying heathen literature and magic, and is said to have
practised the art of ventriloquism. Athelstan at length
ordered him to leave the court, but he was not permitted to
depart in peace. As he rode away he was pursued by some
young nobles, who threw him from his horse and actually
kicked him in the mire.5 Disfigured with mud and bruises,
he crawled to the dry ground, but was immediately attacked
by a pack of hungry dogs. The unhappy youth at length
succeeded in escaping to the house of a friend, and thence
to Winchester, where he sought the protection of his kinsman,
Bishop Elphege the Bald.
A return of brain fever, probably caused by the cruel treat-
ment he had received, followed. During his convalescence,
he was pressed by Bishop Elphege to take orders, with a view
to entering a monastery, but at that time he is said to have
desired to marry a maiden whom he loved. On his recovery
■» Ibid, chapter 7 ; Hook's Lives of the Archbishops, Vol. I., p. 386.
s Vita S. Dunstani, Auctore B., chapter 6, Stubbs' edition (Rolls
series).
91
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
however, he consented to receive ordination from his kinsman,
and shortly afterwards returned to Glastonbury.6
Close to the church of St. Mary he built for himself a
small cell, only five feet long, two-and-a-half feet wide, and not
above four feet in height.7 There he lived the life of a hermit,
occupying himself in prayer, study and various handicrafts.
In his solitude he was haunted by strange fancies. To fly
impure thoughts he wearied himself by labouring at a forge.
It is related that while he was thus engaged the devil fre-
quently appeared to him and tempted him. Dunstan is said
to have put an end to these unwelcome visits by seizing the
fiend by the nose with a pair of red hot tongs.8 In the late
middle ages, St. Dunstan became the patron saint of the
Goldsmith Guild, and a picture, in which he was represented
seizing a naked figure of the devil with a pair of tongs, long
hung in the Goldsmiths' Hall in London.
While Dunstan was living at Glastonbury, he became the
friend and spiritual adviser of a widowed lady of royal blood
named Ethelgiva. At her death, she left to him the whole
of her great wealth.9 As his father died about the same time,
leaving him his heir, Dunstan was now in possession of an
ample fortune, which he determined to devote to the service
of God.
When Edmund succeeded his step-brother King Athelstan,
in 940, Dunstan was recalled to the court, which was
then at Cheddar, near Glastonbury. The new king gave
Dunstan a place among his counsellors, but it was not long
before he again incurred the enmity of the courtiers. Accord-
ing to some accounts the nobles refused to tolerate his
arrogance, and he was once more ordered to leave the court.
Dunstan's biographer records that at this time certain
messengers from the Eastern kingdom (nuncii orientis) were
at Cheddar with the king.10 Some writers suppose this to
mean envoys from East Anglia, with the interests of which
kingdom Dunstan was afterwards closely allied ; others declare
that the words refer to ambassadors from Otto I. of Germany.
6 Vita S. Dunstani, Auctore Eadmero, chapter 6. Stubbs' edition
(Rolls series).
t Ibid. 8 Ibid, chap. 7. 9 Ibid, chapter 8.
10 Vita, Auctore B., ibid, chapter 13.
92
Dunstan
In any case, the envoys, moved by compassion for Dunstan's
friendless position, promised to protect him, and it was
arranged that he should accompany them when they returned
to their own country.
But Dunstan was not yet destined to go into exile. On a
certain day, before the departure of the ambassadors, the king
rode out to hunt. While following a stag on the Mendip
Hills, he far outstripped his followers. The stag made for
Cheddar cliffs, and rushing blindly over the precipice was
followed by the hounds. While vainly endeavouring to stop
his horse, Edmund is said to have made a vow that if his life
was spared, he would restore Dunstan to favour. At that
moment his horse stopped on the very edge of the cliff.
Giving thanks to God, he returned to the royal palace, and
immediately summoned Dunstan to his presence.
" Prepare forthwith to ride with me," said the king, " for
I would go somewhither." The king, accompanied by Dunstan,
rode straight to Glastonbury, the abbacy of which was then
vacant. Entering the church the king gave Dunstan the
kiss of peace, and then placing him in the abbot's chair,
proclaimed him the new abbot of Glastonbury.11 Such is the
story of Dunstan's promotion preserved by the old monkish
chroniclers. It is certain that he was appointed abbot of
Glastonbury in 945, so that if the date given of his birth is
correct, he must have been only twenty-one years old at the
time.
At Dunstan's installation the king confirmed the grants
made by Ina and other kings of Wessex to the abbey of
Glastonbury, and also gave unusual powers to the abbots " in
causes as well known as unknown, in small and great, above
and under the earth, in dry land and water, in woods and in
plains, and that no bishop, duke, prince or their servants
should exercise any authority, or even enter the precincts of
the abbey, without permission from the abbots." "
What had previously been a poor foundation now became,
through the wealth which Dunstan lavished on it, one of the
" Vita S. Dunstani, by William of Malmesbury, chap. 15. Stubbs*
edition (Rolls series).
" Carta Edmundi Regis, num. VIII. in Dugdale's Monasticon Angli-
canum, Vol. I., p. 26.
93
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
richest.13 Close to the old church of St. Mary he built a new
church dedicated to St. Peter, and caused the monastic
buildings to be enlarged and rebuilt. Under him Glastonbury
Abbey became a famous school. He did much to restore the
desire for learning, which, since the days of Alfred the Great,
had been on the decline, and inspired the pupils with his own
love for poetry and music. Dunstan permitted secular clerks
as well as monks to reside at Glastonbury, for the new
Benedictinism, with its strict rule, had not as yet been
introduced into England (vide Ethelgar). The new abbot
of Glastonbury became one of the king's trusted counsellors,
and was frequently at the court. To assist him in the
management of his estates Dunstan appointed his brother
Wulfere steward over his possessions.
Edmund's reign was disturbed by revolts of the Danes, who
had settled in Northumbria. A defeat suffered by the king's
troops at Tamworth, in Staffordshire, forced Edmund to
cede certain provinces north of Watling Street to Anlaf the
Dane, and also to sign a treaty by which it was agreed that
Anlaf should become king of all England if he survived
Edmund. This treaty was, however, annulled by the death
of Anlaf in the following year. Acting on the advice of
Dunstan, Edmund then made it his policy to conciliate the
Danes.
Two years after Dunstan's appointment as abbot, Edmund
was slain by a robber named Leofa. Dunstan conveyed the
king's body to Glastonbury where he buried it with due
honour. Edmund was succeeded by his younger brother,
Edred, who was the same age as Dunstan, to whom he had
been much attached from his youth. The young king suffered
from a painful disease, which often rendered him unfit for
the duties of ruler, and the affairs of the kingdom were left
chiefly in the hands of Dunstan, and of the queen-mother
Eadgifu. In 952 he ordered the imprisonment of Wulfstan,
Archbishop of York, who had joined the Danes in a revolt
against the king. When this revolt had been suppressed
the whole of the Danelaw submitted to Edred. During this
reign Dunstan twice refused a bishopric, that of Winchester
1 Vita, Auctore B., chap. 17.
94
Dunstan
in 951, and Crediton in 953,14 declaring that he would not leave
the king's side so long as he needed him.15
There is evidence however, that the abbot still had
enemies. About this time, his brother Wulfere died, and
was buried at Glastonbury. At the funeral a large stone was
thrown at Dunstan by some unknown hand, knocking his hat
from his head, though it did not injure him.16
Dunstan was at Glastonbury where the royal treasure was
kept, when news reached him, in November 955, that King
Edred lay dying at Frome. The guardian of the hoard was
bidden to bring the treasures that the king might look on
them before he died. But they arrived too late. Messengers
met the abbot as he hurried onward with the news that the
friend he loved was dead ; and the heavy treasure-laden
waggons, toiling along the Somerset lanes, returned to
Glastonbury.17 Dunstan found the corpse already forsaken,
for the thanes had hastened to the presence of the new king,
Edwy, the son of Edmund, brother of Edred. The body
was conveyed by Dunstan to Winchester and there buried.
Edred's death brought about a change in the position of
Dunstan, for the young king, a boy of sixteen, was much
under the influence of Ethelgifu, a woman of noble lineage.
In the midst of his coronation feast, Edwy withdrew from
the hall to seek the company of Ethelgifu, and her daughter
Elgifu. The offended nobles despatched Dunstan and the
bishop of Lichfield to bring him back.
Dunstan appears to have used undue violence of language
towards the ladies before dragging the unwilling youth back
to the hall. This roused their bitter enmity, and Ethelgifu
determined to take revenge on the haughty prelate. A few
months later, she induced the king to banish Dunstan from
England, and to confiscate all his property. Her triumph
was completed by the marriage of her daughter Elgifu with
the young king in 957. Some writers declare that the
marriage took place before Edwy's coronation.
Dunstan sailed for Flanders, where he found a powerful
H Vita, Auctore B., chapter 19.
1 Vita, Auctore Osberno, chapter 22.
16 Vita, Auctore B., chapter 18.
*» Green's Conquest oj England, p. 300.
95
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
protector in Count Arnulf, a grandson of Alfred the Great.
In the monastery of St. Peter at Ghent, which had been
restored by Arnulf, Dunstan was welcomed and honour-
ably entertained. Here he had an opportunity of studying
the reformed Benedictine rule, which beginning at Cluny,
was now spreading over Flanders and France.
Meantime, a rebellion, due probably to the weakness of
Edwy's rule, had taken place in England. Northumbria
and Mercia withdrew from him their allegiance, and pro-
claimed as king, his brother Edgar, a boy of thirteen.
Wessex alone remained loyal to Edwy.18 In 958 Odo,
Archbishop of Canterbury (q. v.), pronounced the sentence
of divorce between the king and Elgifu on the ground that
their relationship was within the forbidden degrees. She
was banished to Ireland, and died soon after making an
attempt to rejoin the king. Some writers declare that she
perished by foul means (vide Odo). The death of Edwy which
occurred soon afterwards restored the unity of the realm under
Edgar.
Influenced by the party who favoured Dunstan, Edgar
had meantime recalled that prelate to England. He was once
more received with much favour at court and soon after his
arrival was made bishop of Worcester. In 959, he also
received the bishopric of London, and held it together with
that of Worcester until the following year.19
The death of Odo, Archbishop of Canterbury, having
occurred before that of Edwy, the king had nominated Elfsin
of Winchester, a prelate of royal birth, to the vacant see.
Elfsin set out for Rome to receive the pallium, but perished
of cold amid the Alpine snows.20 Byrthelm, Bishop of Wells,
was then nominated, but before his translation Edwy died, and
Edgar was induced to refuse his consent to the election.
Dunstan was then duly elected archbishop of Canterbury.
In 960 he went to Rome, and received the pallium from Pope
John XII. On his journey south, he was so lavish in alms-
giving that on one occasion he left himself with insufficient
money to pay for a night's lodging for himself and his suite.
When his attendants remonstrated he assured them that
18 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 957.
* Ibid. 2° Ibid, 959.
96
Dunstan
their Divine Master would provide for all their wants. That
evening a friendly abbot offered them all hospitality in
his monastery, and on their departure provided Dunstan
with sufficient funds to continue the journey.21
On his return to England, he received a warm welcome
at the court. For the next fifteen years Dunstan wielded,
as the minister of Edgar, the chief secular and ecclesiastical
power of the realm.
We have seen that in the time of Odo the Benedictine reforms
had begun to stir the zeal of English churchmen. The chief
outcome of these reforms was to dismiss married clergy from
their benefices, and to replace secular priests by monks.
Though Dunstan was a strong advocate of the celibacy of
the clergy, and earnestly approved of these reforms, there is
no evidence that he resorted to the harsh measures adopted
by certain of his contemporaries in evicting the married
clergy or the secular clerks.32 Though he held the see of Canter-
bury for nearly twenty-eight years he appears to have per-
mitted secular clerks to remain in Christ Church (vide Sigeric),
and in spite of his enormous resources, he founded no Bene-
dictine house in Kent. The chief promoters of the reform were
Ethelwold, Bishop of Winchester, and Oswald, Archbishop
of York.
Edgar, the young king, who was fond of his own pleasure,
was not sorry to leave to Dunstan the weightier affairs of
the state. On the advice of Dunstan, he adopted a concilia-
tory policy towards the Danes, employing them in the royal
service, and promoting them to high positions in church and
state. He also allowed them to make their own laws. He
encouraged commerce, and restored justice and order. Edgar
delighted in pomp, and Dunstan encouraged him to make
royal progresses through the land, holding courts of justice
at different places. Dunstan also induced Edgar to improve
the navy and to hold splendid naval reviews. Tradition
ascribes to Edgar the foundation of forty monasteries.
Never had England been so strong and peaceful as in this
reign. Thanks to Dunstan's skilful statesmanship the sove-
reignty of the English king over the Scots was established,
11 Vita, Auctore B., chapter 7.
" Stubbs' Memorials of St. Dunstan, Introd., cxix.
97
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and to Dunstan is due the fact that this king is known to
history as Edgar the Peace-winner.23 The story that Dunstan
forbade the king to wear his crown for seven years as a
penance for having carried off a nun from Wilton Abbey,
is probably without foundation, though it is certain that
Edgar led a profligate life. For whatever reason, however,
the young king's coronation did not take place till 973, when
he was solemnly crowned at Bath by Dunstan and the arch-
bishop of York.
On the death of Edgar, in 975, the party opposed to Dun-
stan returned to power. They were supported by Elphere,
the powerful alderman of Mercia,24 and by the widow of the
late king, who desired her son Ethelred to succeed to the
throne. Dunstan managed to avert civil war by taking the
question of the succession into his own hands, and, with the
consent of the Witan, solemnly crowned Edward, king Edgar's
son by a former marriage.
Shortly after Edward's coronation, a synod was held at
Winchester, when the secular clergy appealed to the king,
entreating that they might be restored to their former posses-
sions. No decision was reached either at this council or at
another held shortly afterwards. Dunstan summoned a
third council at Calne, in Wiltshire, at which the young king
was not present. At this meeting the archbishop's enemies
assembled in great numbers. Boernhelm, a Scottish bishop,
vehemently opposed the policy of monastic reform and pleaded
the cause of the married clergy with much eloquence, quoting
scripture on their behalf. His speech is said to have pro-
duced a great effect, and Dunstan made no attempt to answer
it, simply declaring that he appealed to Christ as Supreme
Judge. Scarcely had he uttered these words when the floor
of the room in which they were seated gave way with a
fearful crash, and all except Dunstan and his friends who
stood upon a solid beam were precipitated into the apartment
below. Few escaped unhurt, and many were killed. Dunstan
saved himself by clinging to the beam. His friends attributed
his escape to a miracle, vouchsafed as a proof of the Divine
judgment having been given in his favour.25 Many suspected
2-' Cf. Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 975.
2* Ibid. 25 Vita, Auctore Osberno, chapter 36.
98
Dunstan
however, that the whole affair had been arranged beforehand,
with Dunstan's consent, though this is scarcely probable.
In March 978, Edward was assassinated at Corfe Castle
by order of his step-mother, whose son Ethelred (after-
wards surnamed the Unready) succeeded to the throne.
Ethelred's coronation took place on Low Sunday, 979,
and was the last public act in which Dunstan took part.
After the ceremony he is said to have solemnly addressed the
young king in the following prophetic words : " Because
thou hast been raised to the throne by the death of thy brother,
whom thy mother has slain, hear now the word of the Lord :
The sword shall not depart from thy house, but shall rage
against thee, all the days of thy life, cutting off thy seed, until
thy kingdom become the kingdom of an alien whose customs
and tongue the nation which thou rulest knows not."26
Dunstan's influence at court was now ended, and he retired
to Canterbury, where he spent the remainder of his life. He
continued to labour for the spiritual and temporal welfare
of his people, restoring churches, establishing schools, and
providing for the poor. He also worked at the handicrafts
he loved, and delighted in teaching the boys of the cathedral
school. Often, he would entertain them with stories of his
early days. Such was the tradition of his love for bis scholars
that in later times children would often pray to St. Dunstan
for protection against harsh teachers. He was an eloquent
preacher and people flocked to hear him from all quarters.
In the spring of 988, the archbishop's health failed, and
he became very feeble. He is said to have been warned by a
vision of angels of his approaching death. He preached for
the last time on Ascension Day, but had to pause many times
during bis discourse for want of breath.27 On the following
Sunday, May 19, he died. The news of his death was received
with loud wailing by the crowds gathered in the streets of
Canterbury.
He was buried near the altar in Canterbury Cathedral. In
the reign of Henry VIII. the monks of Glastonbury declared
that Dunstan's remains had been secretly conveyed thither
when Canterbury Cathedral was in danger of being sacked by
26 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, a.d. 1016.
27 Vita, Auctore Osberno, chapter 39.
99
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the Danes. In order to prove this story false, Archbishop
Warham (q. v.) caused the tomb of Dunstan to be opened.
The skull and some bones were found, and also a piece of
lead about a foot long with the words : " Hie requiescit
Sanctus Dunstanus, Archiepiscopus."
No extant literary work can be assigned to Dunstan, though
there is evidence that he wrote many tracts and treatises.
Two specimens of his penmanship exist in old charters, one
being in the possession of Canterbury Cathedral. He was
canonized in 1029, and his festival is kept in England on
May 19. Until his fame was overshadowed by that of
Thomas a Becket (q. v.) Dunstan was the favourite saint of
the English people. His shrine was destroyed at the
Reformation.
loo
24— ETHELGAR (or ALGAR), 989 to 990.
King of England : Ethelred II., the Unready, 979 to 1016.
In the appointment of Ethelgar, the successor of Dunstan,
we may discern a compromise between the Benedictines and
the party of the secular clergy. Though a monk of the Bene-
dictine order, he seems to have adopted a moderate policy
towards his opponents.
We first hear of him as a monk of Glastonbury, where he had
come under the influence of Dunstan and Ethelwold. In the
reign of Edred, the monk Ethelwold was sent from Glastonbury
to preside over the new monastery of Abingdon, in Berkshire,
which had been rebuilt by order of the king. In this
monastery, Ethelgar became one of the brethren.1 There the
Benedictine rule was first introduced in England.
In 963, Ethelwold was appointed bishop of Winchester.
His first act was to turn out the secular clergy from the
cathedral church, and from the abbey of New Minster, and to
replace them by monks. With the approval of King Edgar,
Ethelgar was appointed abbot of New Minster.2 From the
time of Edward the Elder, ill-feeling had existed between the
cathedral clergy and the monks of New Minster, and this does
not seem to have been lessened by the appointment of an
abbot who had been one of Bishop Ethelwold's own monks.
It is recorded that when Ethelgar wished to enlarge his
monastery, he was forced to pay to Ethelwold one gold mark
for every foot of land he purchased.3 On May 2, 980,
Ethelgar was consecrated bishop of Selsey in Sussex, by
Dunstan. This see he held for more than eight years, during
which time he made no attempt to enforce the policy of
Ethelwold by dismissing the secular clergy. In this he was
probably supported by Dunstan, who, especially in the later
part of his life, seems to have been opposed to severe measures.
1 Liber de Hyda (Rolls series), p. 182.
3 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 964.
3 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Ang., p. 173.
101
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
On the death of Dunstan, in 988, Ethelgar was appointed to
succeed him as archbishop, and set out to Rome for the
pallium.
From an extant letter addressed by Odbert, Abbot of St.
Bertin's, in France, to Ethelgar, we learn that the arch-
bishop visited the abbot both on his way to Rome and on his
return journey, and bestowed generous gifts on the monastery.4
After his return from Rome nothing is recorded of his acts.
He died on February 13, 990, after a pontificate of only
fifteen months.
< Memorials of St. Dunstan, p. 384.
102
25.— SIGERIC (or SIRIC), 990 to 994.
King of England : Ethelred II., the Unready, 979 to 1016.
Sigeric, who succeeded Ethelgar as archbishop, probably
owed his appointment to the fact that he had enjoyed the
favour of Dunstan (q. v.). Like his predecessor, he had been
a monk at Glastonbury, and afterwards abbot of St. Augustine's,
Canterbury. In 985, he was consecrated bishop of Ramsbury
in Wiltshire (vide Odo), by Dunstan.1
After his translation to the see of Canterbury in 990, he
went to Rome for the pallium, and was honourably received by
Pope John XV. It is probable that he reached the Eternal
City in February or March, 991. An ancient MS. giving some
interesting details concerning his journey has been preserved.
On the day after his arrival he dined with the pope. In spite
of his advanced age he is said to have visited twenty Roman
churches in two days. The names of these churches are given.
Possibly, the exhaustion caused by these exertions made it
necessary for him to travel home by slow stages. No less
than seventy-eight places are mentioned at which he stopped,
between Rome and the point, probably near Calais, where he
embarked for England.2
The character of Sigeric has been blackened on account of
an accusation brought against him by several early writers.
It is stated that after the battle of Maldon (991), in which
there was much slaughter on both sides, the people of England
despaired of driving out the Danes. By the advice of
Sigeric, Archbishop of Canterbury, and the aldermen,
Ethelward and Alfric, King Ethelred was induced for the first
time to pay tribute to the invaders, instead of fighting them
valiantly. The sum of 10,000 pounds was paid to them on
condition that they would conclude a settled peace, and cease
' Anglia Sacra., II., 682.
- Hook's Lives oj the Archbishops of Canterbury, I., 434.
103
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to burn, pillage and murder on the coasts.3 This payment was
the origin of the tax known as the Danegeld, which afterwards
came to be levied on all the inhabitants of England in order to
raise money for the Danes, and which fell heavily on the poorer
classes.
If Sigeric was responsible for this evil counsel he certainly
deserved blame. As might have been expected, the only result
of such a policy was to attract fresh swarms of the sea-robbers,
who now came for the purpose of filling their pockets with
English gold.
Sigeric appears to have been a learned man and a patron
of learning. At his death he left a valuable library to Christ
Church, Canterbury. Elfric " the Grammarian," supposed to
be the same Elfric (q. v.) who succeeded Sigeric as archbishop,
dedicated his " Homilies " to him.4
Sigeric is said to have followed the policy common among
churchmen at this period and to have replaced the secular
clergy of Christ Church by monks. Before his death he pre-
sented seven pallia, probably those worn by his predecessors,
to the church at Glastonbury with instructions that they
should be displayed on his anniversary.5 He died of old age
on October 28, 994, and was buried in Christ Church cathedral.
3 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 991.
» Anglia Sacra., L, 125. 3 Ibid, II., 682.
IO4
26— ELFRIC (or ALFRIC), 995 to 1005.
King of England: Ethelred II., the Unready, 979 to 1016.
The early history of Elfric, who succeeded Sigeric as arch-
bishop, is involved in obscurity. This arises from the name
having been extremely common among the Anglo-Saxons,
and from the difficulty of identifying the archbishop among
other churchmen of the same name.
His identity with Elfric the Grammarian (vide Sigeric),
concerning whose early life many details have been preserved,
is now considered improbable, for the Grammarian, in the
second preface to his " Homilies," mentions the death of
Ethelred the Unready, which did not occur until 1016.
A learned Latin treatise, by Henry Wharton is published
in " Anglia Sacra " (I. pp. 125-134) under the title of " Dis-
sertatio de Elfrico Archiepiscopo " its purpose being to piove
that " the Grammarian " was Elfric, Archbishop of York. His
arguments were attacked by Edward Mores who wrote a
Latin work on the subject in 1789, to prove that the Gram-
marian was the archbishop of Canterbury. This view was
adopted by Dean Hook, and Freeman. Sir F. Madden in his
preface to Matthew Paris's " Historia Anglorum " identifies
Elfric with the eleventh abbot of St. Albans, though the
account given by Paris of this abbot is inconsistent with any-
thing we know of Archbishop Elfric, or of " the Grammarian."
All early historians agree that Archbishop Elfric had been a
monk at Abingdon, and afterwards bishop of Ramsbury, in
Wilts {vide Odo). It is possible that he continued to hold the
latter see after his translation to Canterbury. The statement
that he had some connection with St. Albans appears to be
supported by the terms of his will, a copy of which is extant.
In this he bequeaths lands to the monasteries of St. Albans,
Abingdon, and Cholsey near Wallingford, and to Christ Church,
Canterbury. He appoints as his executors a certain Bishop
105
8
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Wulfstan, probably of London, and Abbot Leofric, who is
said to have been his brother, and to have succeeded him as
abbot of St. Albans. To the king he bequeaths his best
ship, and armour for sixty men. His other ships he leaves
partly to the people of Kent, and partly to those of Wiltshire,1
who at that period were forced to provide ships for the war
against the Danes.
A late and somewhat untrustworthy insertion in the " Anglo-
Saxon Chronicle," under the year 995, gives the following
account of Elfric. " In this year appeared ' cometa,' the
star, and Archbishop Sigic died ; and Alfric Bishop of
Wiltshire was chosen on Easter-day at Amesbury, by King
Ethelred and by all his Witan. This Alfric was a very wise
man, so that there was no sager man in England. Then went
Alfric to his archiepiscopal seat ; and when he came thither,
he was received by those men in orders who were most accept-
able to him, that was by clerks." The " Chronicle " goes on to
state that Elfric convened a council at which many nobles
and wise men were present, and represented to them that in
the time of St. Augustine and his immediate successors monks
were placed in Christ Church by command of Pope Gregory the
Great. To Elfric's great joy, the assembly unanimously
approved his desire to replace the seculars by monks. The
archbishop afterwards had an interview with King Ethelred,
who advised him to proceed at once to Rome for his pallium,
in order that he might ask advice of the pope concerning
the matter. Meantime, the seculars had sent two of their
party to Rome to beg the pope that the pallium might be
given to them. The pope, however, refused their request.
On the arrival of Elfric, the pope received him with much
honour, bestowed on him the pallium, and commanded him to
perform mass at St. Peter's altar. The pope then related to
him how the priests had come and offered great gifts in order
that he should give them the pallium, and how he had
refused to do so. " And the pope said, ' Go now to England
again with God's blessing, and St. Peter's and mine, and as
thou comest home place in thy minster men of that order
which St. Gregory commanded Augustine therein to place by
God's command and St. Peter's and mine." On his return
1 Kemble, Cod. Dip., III., 716.
106
Elfric
to Canterbury, the archbishop did as the pope had com-
manded, and having driven the clerks out of the minster,
placed monks therein. Little credit can be placed on this
story, as it was probably inserted to glorify the monks.
Concerning the acts of Elfric after he became archbishop,
nothing more is recorded. He died on November 16, 1005,
and was buried at Abingdon. In the reign of Cnut, his
remains were removed to Canterbury. The anonymous
writer B, author of a life of St. Dunstan, dedicated his work to
Elfric, whom he begs in the preface to correct the grammatical
errors and to refrain from too severe criticism.2
* Memorials of St. Dunstan (Rolls series), p. 3.
IO7
27-— ELPHEGE (or ALPHEAH), 1006 to 1012. S.
King of England : Ethelred II., the Unready, 979 to 1016.
The period at which we have now arrived is one of the darkest
in English history. For the massacre of St. Brice's day — a
crime due to the senseless policy of Ethelred the Unready —
Sweyn, King of Denmark, had taken a fearful revenge. For
four years he marched through the length and breadth of the
land, lighting his war beacons as he went in blazing home-
stead and town. Then for a heavy bribe he withdrew but
only to prepare for a later and more terrible onset. Meantime
his place was taken by some of the fiercest of the Norwegian
jarls who ceased not to ravage the unhappy country, and to
drain its resources by enforced tribute.
Such was the condition of affairs when Elphege, Bishop of
Winchester, was called to the primacy of the English Church.
Elphege was born of noble parents about the year 954.
Though the heir to great estates, he decided, while still a
youth, to enter a monastery, much against the wishes of his
widowed mother ; for he believed that his soul's salvation
depended on his taking this step. He accordingly retired
to the small Benedictine monastery of Deerhurst, near
Tewkesbury, in Gloucester. There he was remarkable for his
great humility and became the servant of all.1
The rule of this monastery was less strict than that of many
other religious houses at that period. The easy life led by
the monks did not appeal to Elphege's ascetic temperament,
and after a time he withdrew to Bath. There he built himself
a hut in which he lived as a hermit.2
The fame of his sanctity spread abroad, and many came from
afar to seek his counsel. Later he is said to have been made
1 Vita S. Elphegi, by Osbern, in Anglia Sacra., edition Wharton,
part I., p. 125.
« Ibid.
108
Elphege
abbot3 of the monastery which had been founded at Bath, by
Edgar of Wessex. Certain wealthy people who had received
spiritual benefit from him, became monks and lived under his
rule, while others supplied him with money for his brother-
hood.
Through the influence of Dunstan (q. v.) Elphege was chosen,
in 984, to succeed Ethel wold as bishop of Winchester.
During the twenty-two years that he held this see
his life of exemplary piety won the admiration of the
monks. Often he would rise from his bed in the middle
of the night, and betake himself to prayer in the cold church,
where he would remain with bare feet and scanty clothing
until the break of day. He always ate sparingly, and fasted
much. So attenuated did he become that when he raised
his hands while celebrating the Holy Eucharist, the sunlight
passed through them if a window was in front of him.4
Ten years after Elphege' s election to the see of Winchester,
Olaf of Norway, and Sweyn of Denmark, attempted to seize
London with a great fleet of ninety-four galleys. They were
repulsed with considerable loss, but in revenge burned and
wasted Essex, Kent, Sussex, and Hants. King Ethelred, by
the advice of the nobles, sent envoys to them with a promise
of tribute and regular supplies if they would desist from their
barbarities. Consenting to the king's proposal, they retired
to their ships and wintered at Southampton. Their supplies
were provided by the people of Wessex, but their tribute,
consisting of 16,000 pounds, was levied on the whole of the
English people. This roused much dissatisfaction, and it was
agreed that a meeting should take place between Ethelred and
Olaf, in order to try to arrange more favourable terms.5
As ambassadors to Olaf, King Ethelred sent Elphege, Bishop
of Winchester, and Ethelred, the alderman. They were
instructed to give hostages to the Norwegians for the safety
of King Olaf, and to escort him to Andover, where the English
court was then residing. Olaf was received by Ethelred with
much honour. According to some accounts the Norwegian
king had been baptized in his own land by a Christian
J Florence of Worcester, 984.
* Vita S. Elphegi, by Osbern, ibid, p. 127.
5 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 994.
IO9
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
missionary. At Andover, he received the rite of confirm-
ation from Bishop Elphege, Ethelred adopting him as his
godson, and presenting him with a royal gift.6 The result of
the meeting was that Olaf promised never again to invade
England. At the beginning of summer he sailed to his own
kingdom with his fleet, and faithfully kept his promise, for he
never returned.7
On the death of Elfric, in 1006, Elphege was chosen
archbishop of Canterbury. Immediately after his election
he journeyed to Rome, and received the pallium from Pope
J ohn XVI 1 1 . Some time after his return to England, he j oined
Wulfstan, Archbishop of York, in persuading Ethelred to hold
a council at Enham (probably Ensham in Oxfordshire), to
deliberate concerning the affairs of the kingdom. The exact
date of this meeting is not given, but it probably took place
about the year 1009. It was attended by a large number of
clergy and nobles, and the many important decrees drawn
up have been preserved.8 While the council sat daily
services were held in the church and prayers offered for
peace in the distressed kingdom. Those assembled were
called upon to abjure heathen lawlessness, and to take a solemn
pledge of loyalty to the king. Directions were drawn up for
the re-organisation of the fleet and of the army. Christian
men were not to be sold out of the land, least of all to heathen
purchasers. Many decrees were also passed concerning the
church discipline, and the clergy were recommended to prac-
tise continence and to abstain from marriage.9 In these
statutes we can hardly fail to trace the hand of good Archbishop
Elphege.10 Unfortunately, Elphege had to deal with a king
very different from Edgar, and his wise decrees brought little
improvement in the condition of the kingdom, which continued
to get worse and worse. Soon after this, discord arose among
the commanders of the fleet, which the king was consequently
forced to disband after many ships had been lost."
In the same year (1009) there arrived in England a Danish
6 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 994. 7 Ibid.
8 Wilkin's Concilia, Vol. I., pp. 285 to 294. 9 Ibid.
10 Cf. Freeman Norman Conquest, Vol.1., p. 376.
11 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1008 ; Florence of Worcester's Chronicle,
1009.
IIO
Elphege
fleet under Earl Thurkill, who for the next twelve years plays
a prominent part in English history. In the month of August
Thurkill's fleet was followed by a still larger one under the
command of Heming and Eglaf. The two fleets met at
Sandwich, where the crews landed, and marching to
Canterbury, stormed the city. The citizens, with the men of
East Anglia, bought them off with payment of 3,000 pounds.
The Danes then went back to their ships and sailed to the
Isle of Wight, whence they made piratical descents on the coasts
of Sussex and Hants.12 For the next two years the land had
no rest from their depredations.
Early in the year ion, the Witan met and agreed to pay
the large sum of 48,000 pounds to the Danes to buy them off.13
While this sum was being raised they continued their ravages,
and perpetrated deeds of horrible cruelty. Their demand was
ever for " Gold, more gold," and when this was refused
they slaughtered the inhabitants and burned down the
homesteads without mercy. Over the ashes of the depopu-
lated villages, they continued their march through nine
counties,14 until they again reached Canterbury on September 8.
Having dug a trench round the city they besieged it closely.
On the twentieth day of the siege a priest named Elfmar,
whose life Archbishop Elphege had previously saved,
betrayed the city to the Danes. Some writers suppose the
traitor to have been Abbot Elfmar of the monastery of St.
Augustine. Colour is lent to this suspicion by the statement
that the Danes allowed Abbot Elfmar to depart unharmed.15
But as he was afterwards made bishop of Sherborne, he may,
as Freeman points out, have owed his escape to a similarity
between his name and that of the real traitor.16 The traitor,
whoever he was, set fire to one portion of the city, and when
the alarmed garrison rushed to extinguish the flames, he
admitted the Danes through a gate thus left unguarded.
Florence of Worcester gives a detailed account of the horrible
butchery of the citizens.but as the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle"
makes no mention of slaughter, but only of capture, and
plunder, his narrative appears to be open to doubt. Christ
11 Ibid. '3 Ibid, ion, 1012.
M Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ion. •» Ibid.
16 Norman Conquest, Vol. I., p. 385, note.
Ill
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Church, built on the site of the present cathedral, was
plundered and burnt.17
Archbishop Elphege was seized along with other clergy,
and was loaded with fetters, tortured and imprisoned. The
Danes preserved his life, only in the hope that they might
obtain for him a large ransom. When the whole city had
been sacked, the Danes made for their ships carrying Elphege
with them. For the next seven months he remained a prisoner,
being carried with the army wherever it went.
His ransom was fixed at 3,000 pounds, and at first he agreed
that this should be paid.18 But on finding that his people
would have to suffer in order to raise the money, he determined
that no one should have to pay anything for his life. During
his captivity a plague broke out among the Danish soldiers,
and Elphege took advantage of the opportunity thus afforded
him to urge them to abandon their evil lives. Many of them
showed every sign of repentance and were baptized by him.
Meanwhile, the archbishop's ransom was still unpaid.
The Danish fleet now lay off Greenwich. On the Saturday
after Easter (April 19, 1012), the Danes who had procured
a large supply of wine from the south held a great feast.
Having gorged themselves as was their wont and drunk deeply,
they ordered the archbishop to be brought into the hall.
Elphege was brought before them in chains, and they
demanded that he should immediately pay the promised
ransom. He replied that he refused to save his life at the
expense of those who had already paid so much, and that he
was quite ready to die. Roused to fury by his refusal, the
Danes began to throw at him the bones of oxen and othei
remnants of their savage feast with which the floor was littered.
Thurkill the Danish leader, learning what was about to
happen, rushed in, and offered silver and gold, and all he had
except his ship, if they would spare the life of the archbishop.19
But the Danes, in their drunken fury, refused to hearken to his
offer, and continued to pelt the archbishop with stones, logs
of wood, and the bones and skulls of oxen. At last one of them
■» Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1011.
j8 Chronicle oj Thietmar, Archbishop oj Merseburg, in Migne's Patrologice
Cursus Computus, vol. 139, p. 1384.
19 Chronicle oj Thietmar, ibid.
112
Elphege
named Thrum, whom Elphege had confirmed only the day
before, being moved to compassion, put an end to his sufferings
by splitting his head with an axe.20 The Danes soon repented
of the deed, committed in drunken rage. It was probably
owing to the influence of Thurkill, who became a Christian
shortly afterwards,21 and of other Danes whom Elphege
had converted during his sojourn among them, that on the
morrow his body was conveyed to London, where the citizens
received it with all reverence. It was buried in St. Paul's
Cathedral, by the bishops of London and Dorchester.22
Eleven years later, Cnut, who had restored Christ Church,
caused the body of Elphege to be translated with great pomp
to Canterbury and buried there. On account of the tragic
circumstances of his death, Elphege was looked upon as a
martyr, and miracles are said to have been wrought at his
tomb.23 The claim of Elphege to the title of martyr was after-
wards disputed by his successor Lanfranc (q. v.). When
Anselm visited England in 1078, he defended Elphege's claim
to the title on the ground that though he did not die for any
point of Christian belief yet he died for Christian justice, in
refusing to plunder his people to obtain a ransom for himself.24
In this decision Lanfranc acquiesced.
Osbern, a monk of Canterbury, the author of a life of
Dunstan (q. v.), wrote lives of Elphege in prose and verse,
during the episcopate of Lanfranc. The prose life, already
quoted, still exists, but is chiefly legendary. A more trust-
worthy account is that given in the Chronicle of Thietmar,
Archbishop of Merseburg (also quoted above), who states
that he obtained his information from an Englishman named
Sewald.25
The festival of St. Elphege is kept on April 19, the day of
his death, and his translation on June 8. He is sometimes
represented with an axe cleaving his skull.
20 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1012.
21 Cf. Freeman's Norman Conquest, I., pp. 388 and 391.
22 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1012. 23 Ibid.
24 Freeman's Norman Conquest, I., 390 ; cf. Vita Anselemi, by John
of Salisbury in Anglia Sacra, Part II., p. 162.
« Cf. Art. on Elphege by Rev. William Hunt, D.Litt, in Diet.
Nat. Biog.
113
28.— LYVING (or ELSTAN), 1013 to 1020.
Kings of England : Ethelred II., the Unready, 979 to 1016.
Edmund Ironside, 1016.
Cnut of Denmark, 1017 to 1037.
It was not until nearly a year after the murder of Archbishop
Elphege, that a successor was appointed to the see of
Canterbury. The choice of King Ethelred, which fell on
Lyving, Bishop of Wells, was approved by the monks and
clergy. Of Lyving's early life nothing is known, save that
he had been a monk at Glastonbury. After his translation
he proceeded to Rome for the pallium, which he received
from Pope Benedict VIII.1 He is described as a prelate
eminent for energy, wisdom and sanctity.
The Danes had meantime made themselves so completely
masters of the country that King Ethelred in despair fled
to Normandy, and in 1013, Sweyn of Denmark was acknow-
ledged king of England. Sweyn's rule was of short duration
for he died suddenly about six weeks after he was proclaimed
king. The Witan then invited Ethelred to return to his
kingdom, declaring that they loved none better than their
own lord, provided he would be willing to govern them more
wisely. So during Lent, 1014, King Ethelred came home to
his own people, and was gladly received by them all.2 Shortly
after his return he summoned a council at Habam or Badam,
where certain laws relating to the welfare of the kingdom
were passed. All Christians were enjoined to invoke the
mercy of God by alms, confession, and fasting before the
great festivals of the Church. Judges were forbidden to take
bribes, or to pass unjust judgments.3 These decrees were
attested by Lyving, and must have been drawn up with his
approval.
William of Malmesbury states that King Ethelred suffered
1 Gervase of Canterbury, Gesta Regum, II., 361.
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1014. 3 Wilkin's Concilia, I., 295.
114
Lyving
Lyving to be imprisoned for seven months. This statement,
however, is believed to be due to a confusion between him
and his predecessor.
The disastrous reign of Ethelred the Unready was closed by
his death in 1016, and the Witan elected his son, known as
Edmund Ironside, to succeed him. Edmund was crowned
king at London, by Archbishop Lyving. The ravages of
the Danes continued, but Edmund Ironside, unlike his father,
proved a brave and distinguished warrior. He fought the
Danes valiantly in five battles, until at length a compromise
was made, and Cnut, the son of Sweyn, consented to divide
the land with him. The death of Edmund occurred soon
after this agreement, and Cnut of Denmark, at the age of
twenty-one, was crowned king of all England by Archbishop
Lyving.
Of Lyving nothing further is recorded, except that he
beautified the church of Canterbury by noble ornaments.
He died on June 12, 1020, and was buried in Christ Church
cathedral.
115
2Q.— ETHELNOTH (or EGELNODUS), 1020 to 1038.
Kings of England : Cnut, 1017 to 1037.
Harold I., 1037 to 1040.
Ethelnoth, surnamed the Good, a son of Alderman Ethelmar,
of the Western shires, was appointed by Cnut to succeed
Lyving in the see of Canterbury. He is said to have been
a monk at Glastonbury, and afterwards dean of Canterbury.
At the time of his nomination to the primacy he was chaplain
to Cnut.1 It is to be noted that at this period, and until
some time after the Norman Conquest, the appointment of
archbishops was almost entirely in the hands of the sovereigns,
and the approval of the clergy was merely nominal.
Cnut appears to have sent a message to Wulfstan, Arch-
bishop of York, commanding him to consecrate Ethelnoth.
The following reply from Wulfstan has been preserved :
" Wulfstan, Archbishop, humbly greeteth King Cnut his
lord and Elgiva (Emma?), the lady. And I inform you that
we have done to Bishop Ethelnoth as came to us in the notice
from you, and that we have consecrated him."2
After his consecration, Ethelnoth proceeded to Rome,
and received the pallium from Pope Benedict VIII. On his
return journey he stopped at Pavia, in order to buy a valuable
relic, consisting of an arm of St. Augustine of Hippo, whose
remains had been translated to that city. For this relic,
which Ethelnoth afterwards presented to the newly founded
monastery at Coventry, he is said to have paid a hundred
talents of silver and one talent of gold.3
The archbishop was on terms of intimate friendship with
Cnut, over whom he exercised much influence for good.
Some writers declare it to have been largely due to Ethelnoth's
influence that the king, who had at first embraced Christianity
' Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontificum, II. 361.
2 Kemble, Cod. Dip., Vol. VI., 1314.
3 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Aug., p. 311.
Il6
Ethelnoth
from political motives, became a true and earnest follower
of Christ. Contrary to all expectation, Cnut ruled his English
subjects so firmly and wisely that he soon won their affection.
Acting on the counsel of Ethelnoth, he bestowed many gifts
and privileges on English and Danish churches and monasteries,
and also on the cathedral of Chartres in France. Several
English churchmen were appointed by Cnut to Danish
bishoprics, and were consecrated by Ethelnoth. This,
however, led to a dispute with the archbishop of Hamburg,
and Cnut promised that in future there should be no infringe-
ment of that metropolitan's jurisdiction.
In 1023, Cnut caused the body of Archbishop Elphege
(q.v.) to be translated from London to Canterbury Cathedral,
which he had restored. Archbishop Ethelnoth accompanied
the procession from London. On June 15 the remains were
solemnly deposited in Christ Church in the presence of the
king, Queen Emma, her son Harthacnut, and a great assembly
of clergy and nobles.4
About the year 1026, Cnut journeyed to Rome as a humble
pilgrim, with wallet and staff. His simple-hearted greatness
is admirably expressed in a beautiful letter which he addressed
from Rome to the archbishops and bishops and to all his
English subjects, gentle and simple. He expresses an almost
child-like wonder at the honourable reception accorded him
in Rome, and states that he has obtained from the pope and
the emperor exemption from tolls and taxes for such of his
subjects as should in future pass through their territories,
either as pilgrims or merchants. He, on his part, has promised
that the payment of Peter's pence from England shall be
continued. He tells them that he has prayed at all the great
shrines, for which he is the happier, for since it has been taught
him that in the hands of Peter is the power received from the
Lord to bind and loose, it is of great avail to have with the
Lord an advocate in the bearer of the keys of heaven. Lastly,
he tells his subjects that he has resolved to rectify any wrongs
or injustice which he may have done them in the past, and
to atone for his errors by ruling them more justly in the time
to come.5
« Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1023.
s William of Malmesbury, English Chronicle, ed. Bohn, pp. 199 to 202.
117
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Cnut died at Shaftesbury in 1037. He had married Emma,
the widow of Ethelred the Unready, and on his deathbed is
said to have made Ethelnoth promise to crown none but a son
of Emma as king of England. After Harold Harefoot,
the son of Cnut by a former marriage, had seized the throne,
he summoned Ethelnoth to his coronation. The archbishop
came, but placed the crown and sceptre on the altar, declaring
that Harold might take them if he willed, but that while a
son of Emma survived, he would crown none other. He also
forbade any other bishop in the kingdom to perform the
rite.6 The truth of this story, however, is doubtful.
Ethelnoth' was much beloved by both the clergy and laity.
He died on October 29, 1038. A touching account is given
in the " Anglo-Saxon Chronicle " of the devotion shown towards
him by Bishop Ethelric of Selsey. " Ethelric desired of
God that he would not let him live any while after his beloved
Ethelnoth ; and accordingly, within seven days after, he
departed."
6 Freeman's Norman Conquest, I., 488.
Il8
30.— EADSIGE (or EADSINE), 1038 to 1050.
Kings of England : Harold I., 1037 to 1040.
Harthacnut, 1040 to 1042.
Edward the Confessor, 1042 to 1066.
Eadsige, known as the bishop of St. Martin's, was promoted
to the see of Canterbury shortly after the death of Ethelnoth.
Some obscurity exists about the period at which the church
of St. Martin's in Canterbury {vide Augustine) gave its title
to a bishop. As the names of only two bishops consecrated
with this title are recorded, it was probably given only
temporarily. Hook supposes that a bishop of St. Martin's
was appointed as coadjutor to the archbishop, with authority
to officiate during his absence. In the time of Cnut, Eadsige,
who was then a secular priest, had acted as the king's chaplain.
For some reason which is not explained, Cnut had desired
him to become a monk. The probability of his election to
the archbishopric as the successor of Ethelnoth, may have
rendered this advisable {vide Odo). Cnut accordingly
granted Folkestone to the monastery of Christ Church, on
condition that his chaplain should be admitted to the com-
munity, stipulating that Eadsige should have the land for
life.1 At a later period Eadsige seems to have supported the
claim of Earl Godwine of Wessex to Folkestone against
Christ Church.
Two years after his election to the archbishopric, Eadsige
journeyed to Rome and received the pallium from Pope
Benedict IX. After the death of Harthacnut, Eadsige is said
to have assisted Edward the Confessor to obtain the kingdom.2
At Easter, 1043, the Confessor was crowned with great pomp
at Winchester by Archbishop Eadsige. After the ceremony,
1 Kemble Cod. Dip., 1327.
1 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Ang., p. 34.
II9
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Eadsige delivered an impressive sermon, " admonishing the
king as well for his own need as for that of the people."3
Shortly after the coronation, Eadsige was attacked by an
illness which rendered him unfit for his duties. Fearing lest
some unsuitable person should obtain his see through bribery
or influence, he consulted the king and Earl Godwine on the
subject, and it was decided that Siward, Abbot of Abingdon,
should be appointed as his coadjutor. Siward was accordingly
consecrated in 1044, with the title of bishop of Upsala.
During Eadsige 's illness Siward is said to have appropriated
the greater part of the archiepiscopal income, and to have
provided the sick prelate with insufficient funds for his
maintenance, so that he was even deprived of his necessary
food. On account of this injustice, Siward was not promoted
to succeed Eadsige in the archbishopric, but was made
bishop of Rochester.4 This story, however, is open to doubt,
for other writers declare that Siward was himself attacked
by illness, and returned to Abingdon, where he died before
the archbishop. It is quite probable that Eadsige was
dissatisfied with the allowance which he received during his
illness, and that a dispute consequently arose between him
and Siward, who was supported by the chapter of Christ
Church. But as Eadsige again attests charters as archbishop
from the year 1046, he appears to have recovered suffi-
ciently to rule his see some time before his death, which
occurred on October 29, 1050.
The ill-feeling due to the dispute concerning his allowance,
probably continued to exist between him and the chapter at
Christ Church until his death, for in his will he left land and
a hundred marks to the rival monastery of St. Augustine.5
3 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1043.
4 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Ang., p. 34.
5 Thorn's Chronologia, col. 2247.
120
3i.— ROBERT (or CHAMPART), 1051 to 1052.
King of England : Edward the Confessor, 1042 to 1066.
Since the accession of Edward the Confessor in 1042 the
Norman influence had been gradually gaining ground in
England. The sympathies and tastes of the king, who had
spent twenty-seven years of his life in exile in France, were
entirely Norman. In spite of the oath taken to the contrary
at his coronation, he had surrounded himself with Norman
favourites. By 1050 all the chief offices of state were filled
by Normans, and the fear lest a Norman should be appointed
to the primacy had frequently troubled the minds of English
churchmen during the illness of Archbishop Eadsige. It was
for this reason that, shortly after the death of the latter,
the clergy and monks of Canterbury hastened to make a
canonical election, without waiting to consult the wishes
of the king. Their choice fell on a monk named Elfric, from
the monastery of St. Augustine, who was much beloved by
the whole community, and well skilled in ecclesiastical
matters. As he was a kinsman of the powerful Earl Godwine,
of Wessex, the monks begged the earl to use his influence with
the king to confirm the election. This Godwine readily
consented to do, as he was strongly opposed to the Norman
influence at Court.1
The earl's petition was not granted, however, for the king
had already decided to appoint a primate of his own choice.
Among the Frenchmen brought to England by Edward, was
Robert, Abbot of Jumieges, who since 1044 had held the see
of London. Robert had been prior of St. Ouen, at Rouen,
and in 1037 was chosen abbot of the monastery of St. Jumieges
on the Seine. While holding this position he became intimate
with the Confessor, who was indeed better fitted to be a
monk himself than the ruler of England. Robert became
Edward's spiritual adviser, and being a prelate of con-
1 Life of Edward the Confessor (Rolls Series), p. 399.
121
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
siderable ability soon won much influence over his royal
patron. It was commonly said at the English Court that if
the bishop asserted a black crow was white, the King would
believe him sooner than the evidence of his own eyes.2
On Robert, therefore, the king's choice fell. Much to the
indignation of the clergy and people, the canonical election
of Elfric was set aside, and Robert translated from London
to the archbishopric of Canterbury. The feeling against the
Norman archbishop was increased, when, on his return from
Rome with the pallium, he refused to consecrate Spearhafoc,
Abbot of Abingdon, to the see of London. The abbot came
with the royal writ for his consecration, but Robert refused
to perform the ceremony, saying that the pope had forbidden
him to do so.3
As might have been expected, a quarrel soon arose between
the archbishop and Earl Godwine, the immediate cause
being a dispute concerning some property. Robert is said
to have used his influence with the king against the earl,
whom he accused of having been concerned in the murder of
the king's brother Alfred, in 1036.
After the banishment of Godwine, Robert's power at
court became supreme. The king had married Edgitha, a
daughter of Earl Godwine. Robert, not content with the
exile of the earl and his sons, attempted to bring about a
separation between the king and Edgitha. Edward, who
was naturally disposed to celibacy, sent her to Wherwell
Abbey, where she had been educated, on the pretence that
she should there await a return of more peaceful times in the
kingdom.4 It was probably during Godwine's exile that
King Edward sent the archbishop with an embassy to his
cousin William, Duke of Normandy, who, soon after receiving
it, visited the English Court.
In September, 1052, Godwine returned to England, and
a reconciliation took place between him and the king. The
archbishop, on hearing of the return of his most powerful
enemy, knew that his reign was over. Without waiting to
be dismissed, he fled from Canterbury, and, in company with
1 Freeman's Norman Conquest, II., 70.
3 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1048.
* Life of Edward the Confessor (Rolls series), p. 403.
122
Robert
Ulf, Bishop of Dorchester, made his way by a circuitous route
to the coast. On their way through London the Norman
prelates and their followers slew and wounded many men.
The " Chronicle" records that in his flight Robert left his pallium
behind him, " as God would have it, inasmuch as he had
before obtained the dignity as God would not have it."5 At
Walton-on-Naze, in Essex, the two prelates embarked for
France in a crazy fishing- vessel.
After his arrival in Normandy, Robert learned that the
Witan had deposed him from the archbishopric and declared
him an outlaw. He accordingly journeyed to Rome to lay
his case before the pope. Leo IX. decided in his favour,
but he did not regain possession of his see. He died at
Jumieges shortly after his return from Rome, and was buried
in the abbey church of St. Mary. The deposition of Robert
was afterwards one of the many pretexts put forward by
William of Normandy for the invasion of England.6
s Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1052.
6 Freeman's Norman Conquest, II., 71, 331.
123
32. — STIGAND, 1052 to 1070.
Kings of England: Edward the Confessor, 1042 to 1066.
Harold II., 1066.
William I., 1066 to 1087.
The sorrowful figure of Stigand, the last Anglo-Saxon arch-
bishop, now comes upon the scene. The {circumstances of
his unfortunate career and the tragedy of its close are so full
of pathos that the majority of his biographers have been led
to deal gently with his many faults.
Of Stigand's birth and early career nothing is known. We
first hear of him as a priest of the church of Assandun, in
Essex, which had been erected by Cnut in memory of his
victory over Edmund Ironside, and as an atonement for
his earlier crimes. After the death of Cnut, Stigand became
chaplain to Harold Harefoot, by whom he was nominated
bishop of Elmham, in East Anglia, but for some reason
which is not clear his nomination to this see was cancelled
before his consecration, and Grimkytell appointed in his
place. Later, however, Stigand was consecrated to the
see of Elmham, and is said to have been afterwards translated
to that of Selsey, in Sussex, his brother Ethelmaer being
appointed to Elmham.1
At the commencement of Edward the Confessor's reign
Stigand appears to have been restored to the see of Elmham
and acted as chief councillor to Emma, the widow of
Ethelred and Cnut. Since her marriage with Cnut, Emma
had attached herself to the Danish interests. It seems
probable that she had even intrigued with the Danes against
Edward, her son by her first marriage, for soon after his
accession he deprived her of most of her property, and sent
her to live in seclusion at Winchester. Stigand shared in
Emma's disgrace, because she had " acted in all things
according to his counsel." The king therefore deprived him
1 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1048.
124
Stigand
of the see of Elmham, and seized all his possessions,2 from
which we may infer that even at this early date Stigand had
opposed himself to the Norman influence. In the following
year, however, he was reinstated in the see of Elmham, and
in 1047 was made bishop of Winchester.
As Stigand had attached himself to the Saxon party, he
was employed by Edward to conduct negotiations with
Godwine, and is said to have been instrumental in bringing
about the reconciliation between the king and the earl in
1052. We have seen that this reconciliation involved the
overthrow of the Norman archbishop, Robert of Jumieges
(q.v.). At the Witenagemot held at Winchester in September,
1052, sentence of deposition and outlawry was pronounced
against Robert, and Stigand was appointed in his place
as archbishop of Canterbury.
For some reason Stigand was permitted at his own desire
to hold the see of Winchester along with that of Canterbury.
Though the holding of more than one see was forbidden by
the canons of the Roman Church, this prohibition was
frequently disregarded. We have seen that in 959, St.
Dunstan (q.v.) received the bishopric of London, and held
it together with that of Worcester until the following year.
His infringement of the canons in this respect was, however,
one of the charges afterwards brought against Stigand.
Though it is not clear in what respect his election had been
less canonical than that of many of his predecessors, who
had been nominated by ruling sovereigns, his ecclesiastical
position was doubtful from the first, and many English
bishops refused to receive consecration at his hands. The
right of the popes to confirm the appointment of the arch-
bishops of Canterbury was still recognised by English church-
men, and as the pope had decided in favour of Robert of
Jumieges, whom he declared to have been unlawfully deposed,
it was vain for Stigand to look for recognition from the
apostolic see. One chronicler declares that during his
occupancy of the see of Canterbury, Stigand was excom-
municated by no less than five popes.
Not until six years after his election as archbishop did
Stigand receive a pallium from Rome. One of the charges
» Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1043.
125
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
afterwards brought against him was that during these six
years he had worn the pallium of his predecessor. About the
year 1058, Earl Harold of Wessex, who after the death of his
father, Godwine, had become the leader of the Saxon party,
made a pilgrimage to Rome. Freeman supposes that Harold
may have pleaded the cause of his friend Stigand to the pope,
and that on his return to England, he brought with him the
long-desired pallium for the archbishop. Unfortunately,
for Stigand, the apostolic see was at that time occupied
by an antipope who had assumed the name of Benedict X.
As the usual policy of antipopes was to annul the acts of the
true popes, it is not surprising to learn that Benedict sent
the pallium to Stigand. Until some months after his election
the insecurity of Benedict's position may not have been fully
understood in England. Hence the arrival of the pallium
may for a time have improved the unfortunate position of
Stigand, and we hear of his consecrating two bishops, one to
the see of Selsey, and the other to Rochester in 1058. 3
A few months later, however, Benedict X. was driven from
the papal chair, and the recognition of Stigand by an antipope
made his position worse than it had been before. Though
he was permitted to sign documents as archbishop, his ser-
vices were constantly rejected, even by the Saxon party to
which he belonged. His friend Earl Harold, to whom he
might have looked for support, seems to have shared the
general feeling against him, for Harold caused his famous
foundation, Waltham Abbey, to be consecrated by Kynsey,
Archbishop of York, and we learn that, shortly afterwards,
Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester, refused to receive consecration
from Stigand. Nor was the unfortunate archbishop invited by
Edward the Confessor to consecrate Westminster Abbey in 1065.
During his last illness, the Confessor was troubled by strange
visions, and predicted that after his death many calamities
would overtake his kingdom. While the Norman courtiers
and monks stood amazed around the bed of their dying
sovereign, the Saxon archbishop, with blunt common-sense,
declared his belief that the visions were but the idle ravings of
a sick old man.4
3 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
* William of Malmesbury, Gesta Reg. Ang., p. 277.
126
Stigand
The majority of early English historians state that Earl
Harold was crowned king not by Stigand, but by Aldred,
Archbishop of York, and on the whole, this seems most prob-
able. On the other hand, the Norman-French writers insist
that Stigand officiated at the ceremony, their object evidently
being to present Harold's coronation as uncanonical and
invalid. The Bayeux tapestry does not show the actual
coronation of Harold, but represents the king crowned, and
seated on a throne after the ceremony, while Stigand stands
by seemingly addressing the people.5
The hopes of all English churchmen were now centred on
their Saxon king, who seemed eminently fitted to maintain
their rights against Norman tyranny. But these hopes were
only born to be finally and completely quenched by his defeat
and death at the battle of Hastings, a few months later. With
the advent of the Conqueror, Norman influence again reigned
supreme.
After the death of Harold, Stigand had joined the Earls.
Edwin and Morcar in electing Edgar Atheling to the English
throne. But the Saxons were without a leader, and at this
crisis none among them seem to have been capable of heroic
action, least of all Stigand himself. On learning that William
was marching on London, he accompanied the Atheling and
other nobles to Wallingford, where they submitted to the
Conqueror, and swore fealty to him.
On Christmas Day, 1066, William was crowned in London
by Aldred, Archbishop of York, "having refused," says the
French chronicler, " to be crowned by Stigand, whom the
zeal of the apostolic see had struck with anathema."6 In
the following March, when William returned to Normandy
Stigand and a number of English nobles rode in his suite.
Though Stigand had been forced against his will to accompany
the Conqueror to Normandy, he was treated with much
honour and respect at all places in the duchy through which he
passed. It is probable that William, in taking Stigand to
Normandy, had no other object than to add to the importance
of his retinue.
s Freeman's Norman Conquest, III., 616.
6 William of Poitier's Vie de Guillaume le Conquer ant (edition Guizot),
p. 414.
127
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
After Stigand's return to England with the king, he is
said to have joined a revolt of the Saxons against the Normans.
There is however, no real evidence for the truth of this state-
ment. The story that the archbishop took refuge in the fens
of Lincolnshire, with Hereward and his followers, and was only
captured after the surrender of the famous camp at Ely, is
probably an invention. Nor is there any evidence to prove
that William was at first inclined to show to the archbishop
favours which he afterwards withdrew. The Conqueror's
sole motive in deposing Stigand was probably that he might
appoint an archbishop of his own choice, who was not under
the papal ban, especially as he desired to keep on friendly
terms with the apostolic see.
In 1070, Pope Alexander II. sent legates to England, at
William's request, to regulate the affairs of the English
church. The legates summoned Stigand to appear before
them at a council held at Winchester. Various improbable
charges were brought against him, including perjury and
homicide, but these apparently were not proven, for only on
the three following was he condemned : (1) Because he had
occupied the archbishopric in the lifetime of Robert of
Jumieges ; (2) Because for six years he had worn the
pallium of his predecessor ; (3) Because he had received
his own pallium from a schismatic. Had William chosen
to support him it is evident that these charges would
have been insufficient to condemn him. Stigand was deposed
from both his sees, and condemned to imprisonment at
Winchester.
Some writers declare that he was kept in chains and received
the hardest usage until his death. Though nothing could have
justified such treatment of the deposed prelate it would only
have been in keeping with William's character for cruelty.
At the same council, other English prelates were deposed from
their sees, but were permitted to retire to monasteries.
During his captivity, Stigand lived very sparingly, often
denying himself the barest necessaries. Queen Edgitha, the
widow of the Confessor, and other friends of Stigand,
frequently pressed him to live more comfortably, but he
declared that he had not the means. After his death, how-
ever, on his wasted body a small key was discovered, which
128
Stigand
opened a cave containing countless treasures.7 Charts were
also found showing where gold and silver had been buried
on his estates. He is said to have wrongfully held lands
belonging to the monasteries of Ely and Abingdon, and it
is probable that there may have been truth in the accusations
of simony and of covetousness brought against him by his
enemies. Records are, however, extant which show that he
bestowed many rich gifts on different churches.8
Dean Hook suggests that the money and treasure hoarded
by the captive prelate may have been intended for use in the
event of a Saxon revolt against the hated Norman rule.
Broken down and disheartened by his many misfortunes
and cruel imprisonment, Stigand lived but two years after his
deposition from the see of Canterbury. He died in 1072,
and was buried in the abbey church of St. Swithin at
Winchester.
» Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontificum, II., p. 363.
8 Ibid, Opera I., 70.
129
33. LAN FRANC, 1070 to 1089.
Kings of England : William I., 1066 to 1087.
William II., Rufus, 1087 to 1100.
Some time previous to the deposition of Stigand, William the
Conqueror had determined to place in the see of Canterbury,
one eminently well fitted to rule the Church of the conquered
island. This was the great scholar Lanfranc, Abbot of
St. Stephen's at Caen, whose success as a teacher had won for
him a European reputation, and who next to the great Hilde-
brand himself was then the most prominent churchman in
Western Christendom.
Lanfranc was born in the early years of the eleventh century,
at Pavia in Lombardy, where his father Hanbald, held the
rank of a magistrate. He was trained in the legal studies for
which Northern Italy was then becoming famous, and excelled
in all secular learning, including the knowledge of Greek.
While yet a young man, he acquired such proficiency in
jurisprudence that he was consulted by the most eminent
jurists of his time.
After his father's death, he crossed the Alps, and was for
some years a teacher in France. Among his pupils was one
Paul, afterwards abbot of St. Alban's, whom tradition
declared to be his son, though there is no evidence to
confirm the statement. In 1039, we ^n<^ n^m settled at
Avranches in Normandy, where he founded a school in
which he taught for three years with conspicuous success.
But at the height of his fame, he became dissatisfied with his
life, and suddenly left Avranches with the intention, according
to some writers, of entering a monastery. Others declare
that he was undecided as to his next step, and was proceeding
to Rome, when an unexpected event opened for him the career
to which he was destined. While passing through one of the
forests, with which the country was covered, he was stopped
by a troop of brigands, who robbed him of his purse, and of
all his belongings. They then tied him to a tree in the
130
Lanfranc
thickest part of the forest, and left him to his fate. During
the night that followed, he sought comfort by attempting to
repeat some of the prayers and offices of the Church. But
though proficient in secular learning, he had neglected the
things of religion, and could repeat none of the prayers from
memory. He then made a vow that if his life were preserved,
he would spend it differently.
The long night passed, and at daybreak, his cries were
heard by some travellers in the forest, who released him, and
led him back to the road. Before parting with his rescuers,
he requested them to direct him to the poorest monastery in
the neighbourhood. They directed him to Bee.1
In 1034, a small monastery had been founded near Bonne-
ville by Herluin, a Norman noble, of Danish descent. A few
years later, it was removed to a more suitable site two miles
away in the valley of a small stream or bee, whence it derived
its name. On the day of Lanfranc's arrival, Herluin was
engaged, with the aid of a brother named Roger, in construct-
ing an oven, for the use of the monks. Seeing a stranger
approach he paused in his work. " God save you," said
Lanfranc. " God bless you," replied the abbot, who had
recognized the foreign accent of the stranger, " You are a
Lombard ? " "I am." " What do you desire ? " " To
enter the monastery." The abbot ordered brother Roger
to bring the book of rules. When Lanfranc had read them, he
declared that he was prepared to follow them with joy.
Herluin, who is said to have been unable to read himself,
recognized that the scholar had been sent by God to instruct
the monks.2 Thus, at the age of thirty-seven, Lanfranc
became a monk of the order of St. Benedict.
For the next three years, he lived in the humble seclusion of
the monastery engaged in teaching the monks, and in the most
menial work. Little did the monks suspect — so deep was
his humility — that one of the greatest scholars of the age was
dwelling among them. It is related of him that one day,
when reading aloud in the refectory, the prior corrected his
Latin pronunciation, ordering him to shorten the second
syllable of docere. Lanfranc meekly obeyed.3
1 Vita S. Lanfranci, by Milo Crispin, cap. I. * Ibid.
3 Ibid, cap. 2.
131
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
At length, however, he is said to have been disgusted with
the low habits of the monks, and determined to become a
hermit. From this Herluin dissuaded him, and made him
prior of the monastery. To pay the expenses of the new
buildings at Bee, the abbot opened a school in which Lanfranc
taught. His fame soon spread abroad, and scholars flocked
to him not only from France and Normandy, but from Gascony
Flanders, Germany, and Italy. All the great men of
Normandy now lavished gifts on the monastery. Many of
his scholars afterwards attained high positions in the Church.
Among the most noted were Anselm of Milan, who afterwards
became Pope Alexander II., and another Anselm (q. v.), who
was destined to become Lanfr an c's famous successor in the see
of Canterbury. Lanfranc's fame as a theologian caused him
to be called upon to defend the doctrine of Transubstantia-
tion, against the attacks of Beranger of Tours, who had been
his personal friend. This he did with marked ability and
success, at councils held at Vercelli, Tours and Rome. Beran-
ger was finally condemned, and the doctrine of Transubstan-
tiation, which is said by Catholic writers to have been held
by Christians from the earliest times, was declared to form
part of the doctrine of the Church. Many years later (c. 1080)
Lanfranc wrote his famous treatise " De Corpore et Sanguine
Domini," a work which was considered conclusive, and
became a text-book in the schools.
About the year 1058, a rumour reached the Norman court
that the prior of Bee had dared to denounce the marriage of
Duke William with Matilda of Flanders, on the ground of
consanguinity. William, in great wrath, ordered the prior
to leave his dominions. Lanfranc, with one servant, set out
mounted on a lame horse, the only one with which the
monastery could provide him. On the way he met Duke
William, either by accident or design. " By your command,
I am leaving your dominions," said Lanfranc, " but I could
do so more quickly if you would provide me with a better
horse." William, much amused, entered into conversation
with him, and a reconciliation took place between them.4
Thus began between the two great men a friendship which
lasted till death parted them. Shortly after this interview
* Ibid, cap. 4.
132
Lanfranc
Lanfranc was on his way to Rome to obtain the papal dis-
pensation for William's marriage with Matilda. He was
successful in his mission, and so won the life-long gratitude
of the Conqueror. Pope Nicholas II. stipulated that, as a
condition of the dispensation, William and Matilda should
build two abbeys and four hospitals. The abbeys were
built at Caen. Over that of St. Stephen's, the one built by
William, Lanfranc was appointed abbot. At the same time
he was made preceptor to the duke's children, and became
William's most trusted counsellor. Without doubt he guided
the policy by which William obtained the pope's consent
to the invasion of England, and which gave to the expedition
something of the character of a holy war.
In 1067, Lanfranc declined to accept the bishopric of Rouen,
and some writers infer that at this date he already knew of
William's intention to promote him to a still higher honour.
In 1070, however, he appears to have accepted the arch-
bishopric of Canterbury only with the greatest reluctance.
Queen Matilda, her favourite son Robert and Lanfranc's
old friend Herluin, all entreated him in vain, and it was only
when two papal legates visited Caen, and laid on him the accep-
tance of the archbishopric as a command from their master
that he yielded. To rule the Church of a conquered country
in the midst of a foreign people, who would naturally regard
him with distrust, was indeed no easy task, and the idea held
by certain writers that his reluctance was feigned has little
to justify it. The following extracts from a letter which
he afterwards wrote to Pope Alexander II. show how great
was the burden laid upon him. " Ah, if you knew," he writes,
" all the griefs and cares which overwhelm me ! If you could
see with your eyes the torrent of vices that overflow on all
sides, and that my feeble arm cannot check, you would under
stand and excuse the distaste which I have for this life. Have
pity on me, oh my father ! Deliver me, you who have bound
me. Give back the poor monk to the cloister for which he
was made, and which he ought never to have left."5
In 1071, Lanfranc went to Rome for the pallium, and was
received with much honour by his former pupil, Pope
Alexander II. He was accompanied to Rome by Thomas,
s Vie de Lanfranc, par M. A. Charma, p. 26.
133
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Archbishop of York, and Remigius, Bishop of Lincoln. A dis-
pute had arisen concerning the supremacy of the see of
Canterbury over York, and it had been decided to refer the
matter to the pope.6 Alexander II., however, ordered that
the dispute should be settled by a council of English bishops.
The case was finally decided in favour of Canterbury, at a
national synod held at London, at Whitsuntide 1072.
Lanfranc has been accused by certain modern writers of
carrying his point by the use of forged documents. Refer-
ence has already been made to a series of ten letters quoted
by William of Malmesbury, which were produced for the first
time by Lanfranc in 1072 (vide Justus). These purport to
have been written in the seventh century by different popes,
who give the primacy of the whole English Church to
Canterbury.7
Though these letters are undoubtedly spurious, it is impossi-
ble now to decide what share, if any, Lanfranc had in forging
them. The upright character of the great prelate increases
the difficulty of supposing that he could have been implicated
in such a fraud. It is obvious that the supremacy of Can-
terbury over York would at that period fall in with William's
policy for the consolidation of the kingdom. Northumbria
had been hard to subdue, and still lay open to Danish invaders.
An independent archbishop of York, who might consecrate a
king of the Northumbrians either native or Danish, would
undoubtedly have been dangerous.8
Lanfranc's first work after his installation at Canterbury,
was to commence the rebuilding of Christ Church, which had
been destroyed by fire in 1067. The archbishop had been
consecrated on his arrival in a temporary building, by nine
of his suffragans. The new cathedral was rebuilt in seven
years, and rendered nearly complete. Lanfranc took as his
model the church of St. Stephen's at Caen, which was cruci-
form in shape with two western towers. He raised the number
of his chapter to one hundred and fifty, dismissing all the
secular clergy and making it completely monastic. During
6 Anglo Saxon Chronicle, 1070.
> William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pont. Ang., p. 49-51 '.
cf. Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, III., 66.
8 Freeman's William the Conqueror, p. 142.
134
Lanfranc
his pontificate many beautiful Norman churches were erected
in different parts of England. At Canterbury, he also caused
two hospitals to be built for the sick and poor.
With the Conqueror's approval, Lanfranc entirely re-
organised the English Church on the model of the con-
tinental Churches. We have seen that in the time of his
predecessor English prelates had been removed to make way for
foreigners, and by 1070, only two sees in England retained
native bishops. The general result of the reforms of
William and Lanfranc was to bring the Church of England
into conformity with the doctrines and practice of the
west, and hence into closer union with Rome. One of
the most important changes made by Lanfranc was the
separation of Church jurisdiction from the secular busi-
ness of the courts of law. Henceforth the bishop presided
over his own court. All the important sees were removed
from villages to cities. Lanfranc has been called the
" father of monks," and under his influence a sterner and more
ascetic rule was gradually introduced in the English Church.
To a considerable extent this was necessary on account of the
laxity of morals which then prevailed among the clergy.
Though his reforms were to some extent unpopular, he
succeeded in winning the almost universal love and admira-
tion of the conquered people, which proves that he possessed
unusual tact and sympathy.
Only once do we hear of his employing force to carry out
his reforms. This was when in the reign of Rufus he installed
Wydo as abbot of St. Augustine's against the will of the
monks. The brethren, who refused to receive the new abbot,
were ordered to leave the monastery. They took refuge in the
church of St. Mildred. Lanfranc sent them a message to say
that if they returned to the monastery before the ninth hour,
they would be received, but that if they delayed longer, they
would be treated as renegades. Having received this message
they doubted whether to return or to remain, but at the hour
of refection, when they became hungry, many, repenting of
their obstinacy, sent to Lanfranc, and promised submission.
These he treated leniently, on condition that they professed
obedience to the new abbot. The others, along with their
prior, he caused to be imprisoned. A monk named Columban,
135
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
who afterwards plotted the death of the new abbot, was by
Lanfranc's orders tied naked to the gates of St. Augustine's,
and flogged in the sight of the people. He was then driven
from the city.9
Though the reforms of Lanfranc ultimately tended to bring
the English Church into closer dependence on Rome, he faith-
fully supported the imperial policy of William. While the
majority of European princes acquiesced in rendering obedi-
ence to the great Hildebrand (Pope Gregory VII.), the
Conqueror stoutly maintained his independence in secular
matters. The following characteristic letter was sent back by
William to Gregory by a papal legate, who had visited
England : " Thy legate, Holy Father, hath called upon me
in thy name to take the oath of fealty to thee and to thy
successors, and to exert myself in forcing the more regular
payment of the money [Peter's Pence], which my predecessors
were accustomed to remit to the Church of Rome. One
request I have granted, the other I refuse. Homage to thee
I have not chosen nor do I choose to do. I never made a
promise to that effect, nor do I find that it was ever performed
by my predecessors to thine. The money in question, during
the three years past, owing to my being frequently in France,
has been negligently collected. Now, as I am by divine mercy
returned to my kingdom, the money which has been collected
is remitted by the aforesaid legate. As for the rest it shall
be sent as opportunity shall occur, by the legates of our trusty
Archbishop Lanfranc. Pray for us and for our kingdom,
for we always respected thy predecessors, and we would fain
regard thee with sincere affection, and be always thy obedient
servant."10
With regard to the investiture question, William continued
to the end of his reign to appoint bishops and abbots at his
will, independently of the pope. In 1076, Lanfranc went to
Rome, carrying rich gifts for the king to Gregory VII. On his
return journey he visited Bee, and during his stay lived as one
of the brethren of the house.
Some years later, the archbishop was again invited to
Rome by Gregory, who had expressed displeasure with the
independent policy of the Conqueror. A letter from the
9 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1070. I0 Hook's translation.
136
Lanfranc
pope is extant in which the invitation to Lanfranc takes the
form of a command, but the archbishop does not seem to have
complied with the summons. Some writers declare that he
openly defied the pope by his refusal to go to Rome. But it
seems probable that his advanced age was accepted as an
excuse for his refusing to undertake the long journey. On the
subject of the quarrel between the empire and the papacy,
Lanfranc apparently desired to adopt a neutral attitude.
During the king's frequent absences in Normandy, Lanfranc
acted as his vicegerent, and on more than one occasion was
successful in quelling revolts against the royal authority.
The treachery of Odo, the king's half-brother, whom he had
made bishop of Bayeux and Earl of Kent, at length forced
William to imprison him. The king is said to have hesitated
to lay hands on the bishop, until Lanfranc gravely assured
him that it was not the bishop of Bayeux whom he would
arrest, but the Earl of Kent.
The archbishop is said to have often expressed fear lest he
should outlive the king, his master. " So long as the king lives
we will enjoy peace," he once said, " but after his death who
knows what evils may overtake us ? " The calamity he
dreaded befell the kingdom in 1087. From his deathbed in
Rouen, the Conqueror dictated a letter to Lanfranc, " You will
place my son William, who will remit to you this letter, on
the throne of England, and you will sustain him with your
influence and counsels."
Lanfranc loyally fulfilled the dead king's wishes, and crowned
Rufus at Westminster. So long as the archbishop lived, he
continued to support Rufus against his many enemies, and
was to some extent a check on his evil inclinations. But his
restraining hand was soon removed by death. His end is
said to have been hastened by seeing his warnings despised,
and his counsels set aside by the vicious king.
In 1089, Lanfranc was attacked by a fever, but delayed
taking the potion which his physician prescribed for him,
" preferring," says his biographer, "to fortify himself for the
unknown journey from which he did not shrink by first par-
taking of the sacrament of the altar." He afterwards took
the medicine, but it was too late. He died on May 28,
1089, being then about the age of eighty-four, retaining
137
10
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to the last moment, as he had often wished he might do, his
memory and his speech."
Considering his great reputation as a scholar the works
left by Lanfranc are slight and disappointing. His most
important work, the " Liber de Corpore et Sanguine Domini,"
written against the doctrine of Beranger, has been already
mentioned. He also wrote " Decreta pro ordine S. Benedicti,"
a complete ritual for the Benedictine use in England, and a
" Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul," consisting of
short notes, probably used at lectures. Several other pamph-
lets and treatises have been ascribed to him, most of them
probably erroneously. About sixty of his letters have been
preserved. Among his correspondents was St. Margaret,
Queen of Scotland, wife of Malcolm Canmore.
Though not endowed with lofty genius, Lanfranc possessed
the rare talent and singular ability which marked him for a
great man among his fellows. " No one," says Dean Spence,
" in that age of change has left his mark upon the English
Church like the great scholar statesman whom the Conqueror's
unerring eye chose for his adviser." By many writers he is
said to have been unscrupulous in the measures he employed
in carrying out his reform, and indifferent to the suffering he
caused, in which respect he and the Conqueror were accounted
well-matched. Yet at his death Lanfranc was mourned by
all, especially by those who knew him best.
11 Vie de Lanfranc, par M. A. Charma, p. 31.
138
ST. ANSELM.
34- — ANSELM, 1093 to 1109. S.
Kings of England: William Rufus, 1087 to iioo
Henry I., 1100 to 1135.
For nearly four years after the death of Lanfranc, Rufus
kept the see of Canterbury vacant with the avowed purpose of
appropriating its revenues to his own use. The prolonged
vacancy was deeply resented by the English people, who
earnestly desired to see the archbishopric occupied by a
prelate on whom their choice had long been fixed, and whom
alone they believed capable of stemming the torrent of vice
which threatened to overwhelm Church and State. This was
the beloved abbot of Bee, known in later times as St. Anselm.
Anselm was born in 1033, of a rich and noble Lombard
family in the town of Aosta, which then belonged to Burgundy.
His father Gundulf was a man of harsh and violent temper,
who late in life repented of his errors and retired to a cloister.
But the gentle piety of Anselm's mother, Ermenberga,
exercised over him an irresistible influence. The boy was
studious and gifted with a rare intellect. At the age of fifteen
he sought admission to a monastery without the knowledge
of his parents. But the abbot to whom he applied for the
cowl, wisely refused to receive him.
The boy possessed an impetuous temper which led him
to pass quickly from one extreme to another. As he had been
refused admission to the cloister he surrendered himself to the
pleasures of the world. His books once so dear to him lost
their charm, and after the death of his mother he drifted like a
vessel without an anchor. His father conceived for him a
violent dislike which rendered his life unbearable. At length,
at the age of twenty-two, he left his home with one faithful
servant and set out to seek his fortune. For three years he
travelled in Burgundy and France, giving lessons in literature,
and studying under several eminent professors. After a short
residence at Avranches, the fame of Lanfranc (q. v.) drew him
139
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to_.Bec. There he enjoyed intimacy with the great scholar.
The influence of Lanfranc's friendship revived the seeds of
-virtue which his mother had planted in his heart. Remem-
bering the days of his boyhood, he regretted his lost innocence,
and the desire to become a monk returned to him.
At this time his father died, leaving him a large fortune,
which rendered him undecided as to the best course to pursue.
In his uncertainty, he opened his heart to his master Lanfranc,
who advised him to consult Maurilius, Archbishop of Rouen,
and offered to accompany him on a visit to that prelate.1
The result of their consultation was that in 1060 Anselm
became a monk at Bee, at the age of twenty-seven. On the
appointment of Lanfranc to the abbacy of St. Stephen's
at Caen, Anselm succeeded^him as prior of Bee.2 This office
he filled for fifteen years/with conspicuous^success winning
the love and esteem of the whole community.) Abbot Herluin
being now aged, most of the business of the monastery devolved
on the prior. Never had more eager or enlightened care been
brought to bear on the direction of the house. The greater
part of the day was spent by Anselm between the hours of
prayer in giving instructions to the young men in the school.
Many persons of all ranks came to him for counsel, and his
letters show how widespread was his influence. In these
he earnestly and with all dignity exhorts his correspondents
to continuance in a holy course of life, and to faith in Christ.
Part of the night he spent in literary labours and in the
correction of books which had been corrupted through the
fault of transcribers. Break of day often found him still at
his desk. By his writings he soon obtained a reputation far
excelling that of his master Lanfranc, whom he surpassed
both morally and intellectually.3
"On the death of the aged Herluin, in 1078, Anselm was un-
; animously chosen abbot of Bee by the 136 monks who then
composed the community. In vain he threw himself on his
knees, and begged them to take pity on his unworthiness
and his weakness. The monks also" prostrated themselves
before him, and conjured him with sobs and tears not to
betray the interests of the house by refusing to take the
1 Eadmer, Vita Sancti Anselmi (Rolls series), p. 319. • Ibid.
3 J. A. Mohler, Anselm, translated by Cox, p. 19.
140
Anselm
abbot's chair. Moved by their entreaties, he at last consented
As abbot the duty of looking after the property of the
raonastery now devolved on him. This property was not
only in Normandy and France, but on the other side of the
Channel. The great house of Bee appears in four places in
Domesday Book as the holder of lands in England.4 Soon
after his election as abbot, Anselm crossed to England.
During his stay in Canterbury he lived in close intimacy
with his friend Lanfranc, who was now archbishop. From the
time of Anselm's first visit., to. England, the English people
seem to have reverenced him as a saint. Even the proud
Conqueror himself, much to the astonishment of his courtiers,
laid aside his haughtiness in Anselm's presence, and became
mild and gentle.5 William's affection for the abbot of Bee
was proved when in 1087, on his deathbed, at Rouen, he
summoned him to hear his last confession. But the interview
between them was postponed, as it was believed that the king
might recover. Meantime, Anselm himself fell ill, and the
king died without having seen him.
To Eadmer, a monk of Canterbury, we owe the tale of
Anselm's early life. Eadmer was captivated by the kind
words of the Norman abbot during one of the visits of the latter
to England, and remained his faithful disciple through all the
changes of his fortune.
After the death of Lanfranc in 1089, Anselm refused an
invitation to visit England, as rumours had reached him of the
desire to elect him archbishop. Meantime, the tyranny of
Rufus spread misery throughout the kingdom. The king's
indulgence in the foulest crimes was combined with a form of
blasphemy which is said to have startled not only saints but
ordinary sinners. Bishoprics were openly sold to the highest
bidder, and vice of all kinds prevailed within the Church.
At length,. in the year 1092, on the invitation of Hugh, Earl
of Chester, Anselm reluctantly crossed to England. On his
way to Chester he visited the king and boldly reproved him
for his evil Ufe. This only served to ernbitter Rufus against
him. The [guileless simplicity of Anselm's character was
incomprehensible to the vicious monarch? who believed or
4 Freeman's William Rufus, I. 375.
5 Eadmer, Vita Sancti Anselmi, p. 23, 355.
I4I
^tSH£ ^MX ^U^S, >*-4s,
*Pcf)£-> v<Pv>£fll Ujuw ^
' A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
pretended to believe that the abbot secretly desired the arch-
bishopric, and might be induced to pay a large sum forjit.
Soon after Anselm's arrival in England, the kinff fell ill
at Gloucester. The nnhlec seized j;h,e___nppnrtiiriify . i^-prpss
on him. the duty of righting the many wrongs he had- done
to Chnirh and filHlr. At length ho cppt^c f0 haYf; faacome
convinced that his recovery depended on his appointing an
archbishop. He accordingly sent for Anselm, ami nominated
him to the see of Canterbury. Anselm pleaded with tears
that he was an old man, unused to worldly affairs, .ancUvholly
unfitted for the duties of so high an office. The bishops, deaf
to his pleading, dragged him to the king's bedside. After a
violent struggle, the king forced the crozier into his hand-
He was then carried on the shoulders of the bishops to the
nearest church where a joyful crowd had assembled. While
the Te Deum was sung, Anselm, completely exhausted by the
struggle, could only murmur, "It is nought, it is nought that
ye do ! " He then fainted away.6 Though he afterwards
predicted that the king would recover from his sickness, and
assured him that he might, without scruple of conscience,
undo what he had done, Rufus refused to release him from
the archbishopric or to allow him to return to Normandy.
A few weeks later, Angplm rnn^ntH to do homage to the
Vinpr fnr fko ffiTnpnrfl]ltifii nf *"'c see, in which lie was then
invested, but declared that he accepted the archbishopric only
on three conditions : (i) That the property of the see should
be restored in full ; (2) That William should conform to his
advice in all spiritual matters; (3) That he should acknowledge
Urban II. as pope in opposition to the anti-pope Clement.7
Anselm only obtained a partial consent to the first of these
conditions, and the last afterwards involved him in serious
difficulty with the king.
On December 4, 1093, Anselm, at the age of sixty, was,
consecrated at Canterbury by the archbishop of York,
assisted by all. the bishops of his province except three. It
was not long before discord arose between Rufus and the
new archbishop. The king had declared war against his
brother Robert, Duke of Normandy, and in 1094 prepared
to invade the duchy. To pay the expenses of the expedition
6 Eadmer, Historia Novorum in Anglia, p. 37. 7 Ibid., p. 39.
142
4?
Anselm
he appealed to the crown vassals, wlio were forced to furnish
him wiOi iiloiiey.' Anselm was asked to .give i.ooo pounds,
but as he could not raise so much without ruining his church,
he offered to give 50Q._ The kinfl in great indjgnatjpn mtastd
to accept this sum.8
Before setting out for Normandy the king was present at
the consecration of Battle Abbey, which had been founded by
the Conqueror. The ceremony was performed by Anselm
in the presence of a great assembly of nobles and clergy.
Anselm afterwards joined the prelates who assembled at
Hastings to bless the expedition before its departure. He
chose this opportunity of asking the king's permission to
hold a coujicil for, the reform of morals throughout the **>
kingdomJind also begged the king to fill the vacant bishoprics.
But his demands were ill-timed, and William refused to listen
to him.9
The expedition to Normandy proved a failure and William
returned to England in December, 1094. Having exhausted
his revenues he secretly determined to get those of the see of
Canterbury again into his hands.10 Anselm had requested
that he might go to Rome to receive the pallium from Pope
Urban IT., but the king, who seems at this time to have
contemplated giving his allegiance to the anti-pope Clement,
refused the archbishop's request. William the Conqueror
had declared his right to prevent any English subject from
acknowledging a pope without his permission, and Rufus
had no intention of relinquishing this claim. In March, 1095,
a council of churchmen and nobles was held at Rockingham
Castle, in Northamptonshire, to settle the dispute between
Anselm and the king. Rufus, however, failed to overcome
Anselm's patient constancy. The majority of the bishops
who were the creatures of the king sided with him against
Anselm, and would undoubtedly have deposed him had he
not been loyally supported by the clergy and people. A
decision on the matter was postponed until the following
Whitsuntide.
Williarn now determined to gain the pope to his side. He
accordingly despatched envoys to Rome to discover who
was the true pope, and to obtain the pallium, which he intended
8 Ibid., p. 43. • Ibid., p. 48. ,0 M. A. Charma, Anselm.
143
4r
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to bestow on an archbishop of his own choice. The envoys
had no difficulty in ascertaining that Urban was the true
pontiff. On their return to England they weie aCUUinpaiiied
by Walter, Bishop of Albano, who brought the pallium.
With him they proceeded immediately to the court, and
Rufus is said to have offered Walter a large sum of money on
conditions that Anselm should be deposed by papal authority-
This the legate refused to do, and was successful in bringing
about a partial reconciliation between the king and the
archbishop.11 Qn Sunday, June io, IQQ5. the legale brought
the pallium with great pomp to Canfffl-fmry anr* \?™ '+ nn
the altar. Anselm then placed it on his own shoulders.
Little more than a year later fresh troubles arose through
the king's tyranny, and Anselm determined to proceed to
Rome to seek counsel of the pope. Rufus refused to grant
permission for his departure, for he rightly suspected that
/ Anselm wished the pope to release him from his oath of
fealty to his sovereign. The archbishop was informed that
if he set out without the king's permission he would forfeit
his see and all his property. Notwithstanding this threat,
he determined to depart, and at length obtained reluctant
permission to do so.
Before setting out, Anselm visited the king. " Will you
permit me as your spiritual father to give you my blessing ? "
he asked. The Red King was touched. He knelt humbly,
while the archbishop blessed him.12 A strange picture it
must have been — Rufus the debauched and godless tyrant
kneeling before the great-hearted prelate of noble and saintly
mien ! They never met again.
At Dover the archbishop's luggage was searched by a royal
order to see that he had taken nothing which could be seized
by the king. Anselm set out in October, 1097. . Immediately
after his departure William claimed the revenues of the see
and held them until his death. The archbishop journeyed
by slow stages to Rome, visiting Cluny, Lyons and other places
^ /n the way. In France, where the people reverenced him as
' - /a saint, he was greeted with continuous ovations. Soon after
' his arrival in Rome Anselm accompanied Pope Urban II. in
f a progress through Southern Italy. At a council held by the
" Ibid. ■ Eadmer, Historia Novorum, p. 87.
144
Anselm
pQpe at Bari. several Greek bishops were present, and the old
P^+r^VrArcy '-anrlirrnirigi,tfap ftrpffifflo*1 °1 W^ tlUly _Unost
irom the Father n n j ttlfi ^"-""^rc^Yffi1 ttisuacordedTthat
fofifTTTl nf ^"^it^ry ifigJagBMihid ^"i«elf at this council
by his wisdom and learning in the disputes with the Greeks.13
But Anselm's mission to Rome proved a failure. JJrban II.
was either unwilling or unable to give a definite decision on
the quarrel between the king and the archbishop. Many
writers suppose that he feared to offend Rufus by siding openly
with the primate. At a council held^at. Rjpjfle the excom-
mnnirafinr) nf T?nf""- ■»"« ^marukd. l^y iUiiitfjP- assp'rybjid
bishops, but was opposed by Anselm who was supported by
the pope :. . . /^ ^W
Anselm at length left Rome and returned to France there
to await the pope's final decision. While there news reached
him of the death of Rufus. On the morning of August 2,
i ioo, the Red King had ridden forth to hunt in the New
Forest with a great train of nobles and servants. The party
scattered in different directions, and the king was seen to
ride off with Sir Walter Tyrrel, a famous sportsman. That
evening a poor forester was leading his cart home through
the forest, when he stumbled over the king's body which lay
among the ferns with an arrow in the breast. The forester
lifted the body on his cart and brought it to Winchester,
where it was buried.
The news was brought to Anselm by two monks, one from
Canterbury and the other from Bee. q^y^ygjyjn^^yj^was at
first stupefied by the shock, and then burst into a flood of tears.14
Henry I., who now ascended the English throne, was a very
different man from his brother, and his strong rule brought
peace to the kingdom. But though less. vicious than Rufus,
he was equally unscrupulous, and more cunning in the methods
he adopted to attain his ends... One of his first acts was to
recall Anselm to England. The archbishop was received
with great joy by the clergy and people and with much honour
by the king.
Unfortunately, the harmony which at first reigned between
Anselm and Henry was soon destroyed. The archbishop had
■J Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1098.
H Historia Novorum, p. 118.
145
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
returned from Rome fully determined to oppose lay investiture.
It had been the custom for new bishops to do homage for the
temporalities of their see to the reigning prince, and to receive
the ring and crozier at his hands. As these symbols repre-
sented spiritual jurisdiction, Pope Gregory VII. had refused
to tolerate such a custom, and issued decrees that all who had
been invested by lay persons should henceforth cease to be
regarded as clerics. At a council held in Rome during the
sojourn of Anselm in the city, these decrees of Pope Gregory
had been confirmed-
Though the archbishop had previously received investiture
from Rufus, he refused to receive it from Henry. The king,
who seems to have been genuinely anxious to come to terms
with Anselm, sent envoys to Rome to seek the pope's counsel
with regard to the matter, but they brought back the most
contradictory statements. Henry was unwilling to quarrel
with the pope whom he suspected of a desire to support the
claims of Robert of Normandy, his elder brother, to the
throne of England. Robert had, moreover, won the favour
of the pope by engaging in the first crusade. King Henry
at length suggested that the archbishop should go himself
to Rome " to try what he could do with the pope, lest the
king by losing the rights of his predecessors should be
disgraced." So Anselm at the age of sixty-nine once more
set out for Rome.
He was received with much honour by Pope Pascal II.,
who had now succeeded Urban. Though Pascal refused to
give way on the subject of investiture, he appears to have been
ready ta agree to some kind of compromise with-£he king.
But the straightforward character of the archbishop rendered
this impossible. After the conquest of Normandy by. Henry
his position became more secure, and he was more than ever
determined not to give way on the subject of investiture.
As the pope still hesitated to excommunicate King Henry,
Anselm is said to have decided to do so on his own authority,
and proceeded to Normandy for this purpose. But through
the influence of Queen Edith, and of Henry's sister Adela,
Countess of Blois, a meeting was arranged between the king
and the archbishop, and a reconciliation effected.15 In
15 M. A. Charma, Anselm.
146
Anselm
December, 1106, Anselm returned to England after an absence
of more than three years.
Another council met in London on August 1, 1107, when
King Henry flfifilarfo* bofnrp all the assembled people that in
future no cleric should receive investiture from a layman .
Anselm then consented to consecrate all the prelates who had
done homage to the secular power.16 New bishops were
now appointed to the vacant sees, and Anselm is said to
hav£r CBfB^afeaa^many as five in one day. Measures
were also fafrfil) tn ft"fnTCfi P rpfarmatipp of morals throughout
the kingdom, and laws were passed. prohibiting the marriage
or rnniwlHiHiflti nf Him jktfl "" The archbishop ' 6i Vork.
after a supreme effort to maintain his independent position,
submitted to the archbishop of Canterbury (vide Lanfranc).
Hftnry nnw ransiilteri Ansejffl w/ljfr flrfi f ° a^ important
matters uiTEurcn and State, and when obliged to leave
England it was *o *^ p™flfl]frThaf h^ fnmTnittP^T the,
royal authority.
But the great archbishop did not long survive the termin-
ation of the struggle. The austerities practised by him were
greater than his aged frame could endure, and rin the spring of
iioq his hgai+*j fpiwi On Palm Sunday when told Ty one
of his attendants that his end was near, he replied, " If His
will be so I shall gladly obey it." Later he expressed a
humble desire to be permitted to live until he had finished a
book which he was writing. Shortly before his death his
attendants at his request placed him on a bed of ashes, where
he breathed his last on April 21, 1109, a* the age of seventy-
six. He was buried in Christ Church, near the tomb of his
old friend and predecessor Lanfranc. Ii^was not until three
centuries later that at the request of King Henry VII.., Anselm
,was canonized by Pope Alexander VI.
His large-he artedness and winning personality are much
dwelt on by his biographers. His almost feminine tenderness
appears in his love for animals,\vhom he could not endure to
see ill-used. It is related that on one occasion, when he was
out riding, a hare pursued by the hunters took refuge under
the legs of his horse. The huntsmen, sure of their prey,
16 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1107.
1 Ibid., 1 108.
147
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
gathered round, shouting with delight, but Anselm burst into
tears and forbade them to touch the trembling creature.
He declared that it resembled the soul of man, which when
it has left the body is pursued by evil spirits.18
To his gentleness, simplicity and straightforward courage
the long struggle of his life bears ample testimony. In bis
'determination to secure the independence of God's Church
from the secular power he was in deadly earnest. But while
the victory of Anselm secured spiritual privileges to the
Church of England, it involved an acknowledgment of the
supreme jurisdiction of Rome, and laid the foundation of
claims on the part of the Roman pontiffs which were destined
to grow with the years.
" We can hardly blame Anselm," says Freeman, " if at some
later stages of his career he allowed himself to be swayed by
scruples which he had never thought of at the beginning, and
if in his zeal for eternal right he allowed himself to sin against
the laws and customs of England. When England, Normandy,
France and the Empire were as they were in his day, we can
forgive him for looking on the Roman bishop as the one
surviving embodiment of law and right, and for deeming that
when he spoke, it was as when a man listened to the oracles
of God."
A complete edition of Anselm's works, philosophical,
theological and devotional, was first published in Paris in
1721 by Gabriel Gerberon. His fame as a philosopher and
theologian rests chiefly upon three treatises: 1. "JHae-
Monologion," an attempt to prove the . existence of God
by pure reason without the aid of Scripture ; 2. "The
Prosologion," written .in the form of an address to God,
also an attempt to prove the existence of the Deity ; 3. " Cur
Deus Homo ? " of which the aim is to prove the necessity of
the Incarnation as the only means whereby the debt of
obedience due from man to God might be discharged.
Anselm's " Meditations " have been translated into many
languages and are still used in England as a manual of
devotion. Many pamphlets and minor treatises written by
him have also been preserved, and four books of his letters
are extant.
18 Vita Sancti Anselmi,
148
35-— RALPH D'ESCURES, 1114 to 1122.
King of England : Henry L, iioo to 1135.
After the death of Anselm the see of Canterbury remained
vacant for five years. Though King Henry was frequently
urged by the clergy and nobles to elect a new archbishop,
he delayed doing so. Meantime the dispute concerning
investiture continued in Rome, and Henry may have hoped
for a settlement which would release him from the oath he
had taken in 1107 {vide Anselm). During the vacancy the
see of Canterbury was administered by Ralph, the affable
and popular bishop of Rochester.
In the spring of 1114, Henry was at length persuaded to sum-
mon a council at Windsor to elect an archbishop. The king's
choice had fallen on Favricius, a pious monk of Abingdon.
Many of the assembled prelates were of the opinion that
Favricius possessed insufficient knowledge of the world to
undertake the task of ruling the Church in these stormy
times. They therefore declared that they would not
consent to the election of a monk. As a compromise, it was
suggested that Ralph, Bishop of Rochester, who had zealously
upheld the rights of the Church during the vacancy, should
be elected. To this proposal the king agreed.1
Ralph belonged to a noble family of Normandy, his
father, Seffrid, having been lord of Escures, near Seez.
In 1078 he became a monk in the abbey of St. Martin,
at Seez, where his father had previously assumed the
cowl. Though he appears to have been much addicted to
joking and trifling, he combined wisdom with his wit, and
was respected by the monks. In due time he became prior
at Seez, and in 1089 was chosen abbot. This office he filled
with distinction for nearly sixteen years.
During that time he occasionally visited England on
1 William of Malmesbury, Gesta Pont. Ang., p. 126.
149
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
business connected with his monastery, and became intimate
with many of the Anglo-Norman clergy. Anselm of
Canterbury, and Gundulf, Bishop of Rochester, were his
friends. The abbot is also said to have enjoyed the
patronage of the notorious Robert de Belleme, Earl of
Shrewsbury, who is described as a monster for cruelty. He
frequently refused ransom for his prisoners in order that he
might have the pleasure of torturing them to death.2 William
of Malmesbury states that Ralph afterwards sided with King
Henry against the earl, and when the town and castle of
Shrewsbury surrendered to the king, in 1102, the keys of the
city were delivered into Henry's hands by the abbot of
Seez. But this story is probably an invention.
It is certain, however, that this same Robert de Belleme
afterwards greatly oppressed the church at Seez. Abbot
Ralph, having refused to do homage to him for the lands of
the Abbey, was forced to take refuge in England. There he
seems to have lived for some years as a welcome guest in
different monasteries. In 1104 he was present when the
bodies of St. Cuthbert and other saints were disinterred by
the monks of Durham, and were transferred to the new
Cathedral in the presence of many of the Scottish nobility.3
On August 11, 1 108, Ralph was elected to succeed Gundulf
as bishop of Rochester. It is related that during the last
illness of Gundulf, Ralph visited him, and the two friends
spent some time together " in sweet conversations on the
heavenly life." As the abbot was departing Gundulf called
him back to the room, and presented him with his episcopal
ring. Ralph remonstrated, urging that it was unseemly for a
monk to wear a ring, but the bishop replied, " Take it, you
will one day require it." His words were held to have been
prophetic, when shortly afterwards Ralph was chosen as
his successor.
On April 26, 11 14, Ralph was elected to the see of
Canterbury, and was enthroned on May 17. As he
suffered from gout it was agreed to send envoys as his repre-
sentatives to Rome for the pallium. His nephew, John,
afterwards dean of Canterbury, and Ernulf, who at a later
2 Freeman's William Rufus, I. 183.
» Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1104.
150
Ralph D'Escures
period became bishop of Rochester, were chosen for the
mission. On reaching Rome they were coldly received by
Pope Pascal II., who complained of the independent spirit
shown towards Rome by the English Church. According to
one account the pope had already espoused the cause of
Thurstan, Archbishop-elect of York, who had refused to
acknowledge the supremacy of the see of Canterbury. The
legates were forced to return to England without the pallium,
but they had been fortunate in finding a friend in Anselm,
Abbot of St. Sabas, a nephew of the late archbishop. Anselm
interceded with the pope, who authorized him to set out for
England with the pallium, in the capacity of a papal legate.*
His real mission was to persuade the English Church to adopt
a more submissive attitude towards the apostolic see. In
this, however, he was unsuccessful, though cordially received
by the king and the archbishop.
In the following year Abbot Anselm was again employed as
papal nuncio to England, but was stopped in Normandy by
order of King Henry and forbidden to cross the channel. A
council had decreed that for a papal legate to visit the
English Churches uninvited was contrary to the law of the
land. King Henry being then at Rouen, Archbishop Ralph
crossed to Normandy to confer with him on the subject, and it
was decided that the primate should proceed to Rome. On the
way he was taken seriously ill with gout, and with a carbuncle
in the face, which made it necessary for him to keep his
bed for a month, and his attendants despaired of his life.5
At length, however, he recovered sufficiently to proceed on
his journey.
On reaching Rome he found that Pope Pascal II. had been
driven from the city by his enemies, and had taken refuge
in Benevento. From Rome Ralph entered into corres-
pondence with Pascal, who replied only in general terms,
stating that he had no intention of lessening the dignity of
the see of Canterbury. As this was unsatisfactory, Ralph
remained in Italy for some months in the hope that he might
obtain an interview with the pope.6 Failing to succeed in
this, he at length returned to France, and joined the king in
* Eadmer, Historia Novorum, p. 226.
s Ibid., p. 239. 6 Ibid., p. 242.
151
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Normandy. Henry appears to have been on excellent terms
with the archbishop, whom he made one of his counsellors.
In a council held by the king at Rouen in October, 1118,
Ralph took a prominent part.
In the same year Pope Pascal was succeeded by Gelasius II.,
who warmly espoused the cause of Archbishop Thurstan
against Ralph. Gelasius was, however, unable to maintain
his position in Rome owing to the election of an anti-pope,
and withdrew to France. There he convened a council to
deal with the question of investiture, but he died before
it met.
The council met at Rheims under his successor, Pope
Calixtus II., in October, 1119. Archbishop Ralph had been
summoned to attend, but was stricken with paralysis when
about to set out from Rouen. The bishops of Durham,
Exeter, St. David's and Llandaff attended the council, with
King Henry's permission.7 Thurstan, Archbishop-elect of
York, was also permitted to attend at his own request, after
taking a solemn oath that he would not receive consecration
from the pope. Ralph's half-brother Seffrid, who was
abbot of Glastonbury, and afterwards bishop of Chichester,
was also sent to warn the pope, not to consecrate Thurstan.
The council had been convened for October 20, but when
the English bishops presented themselves on that date, they
found that Thurstan had been consecrated by the pope on
the previous day. John, Archdeacon of Canterbury, the
nephew of Ralph, had vehemently protested against the
consecration, but was told that the matter did not concern
the see of Canterbury. On hearing what had taken place
King Henry indignantly forbade Thurstan to enter England,
Normandy or any of his dominions.8 In January, 1121,
however, King Henry, after a prolonged correspondence with
the pope, was induced to recall Archbishop Thurstan, who
now took charge of his diocese. Shortly afterwards Ralph
persuaded the king that he had acted unwisely in recalling
Thurstan, and that another council must be called to deal
with the matter. The council met, but Ralph was prevented
by illness from being present and no decision was reached.
After his paralytic seizure Archbishop Ralph recovered the
1 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1119. s Ibid.
152
Ralph D'Escures
partial use of speech, and was able to conduct the business
of his see. But his illness had seriously affected his temper,
and the once affable prelate became irritable and severe.
During this episcopate the monk Eadmer, famous as the
biographer of St. Anselm and St. Dunstan, was chosen bishop
of St. Andrews, in Scotland, and proceeded thither on the
understanding that he should return to Canterbury for his
consecration. King Alexander I. refused to permit him to
be consecrated by the archbishop of Canterbury, and Eadmer
preferred to resign his claim to the see of St. Andrews rather
than to receive consecration from any other prelate.
On January 30, 1121, the marriage of King Henry I. with
his second wife, the beautiful Adela, daughter of Godfrey, Duke
of Louvain, was celebrated at Windsor. It was proposed
that the bishop of the diocese (Salisbury), should be invited
to perform the ceremony instead of the paralytic archbishop
of Canterbury. But Ralph regarded this arrangement as an
infringement of his rights, and his protest was supported by
all the bishops of his province. The ceremony was accord-
ingly performed by the bishop of Winchester, whom Ralph
chose as his representative.9
On the day after the wedding, Queen Adela was crowned
by Archbishop Ralph. Before the ceremony took place
Ralph perceived with great indignation that the king was
already wearing his crown. It appears to have been the
custom for the archbishop to place the crown on the king's
head before all important ceremonies. The aged prelate,
wearing his archiepiscopal robes, tottered down the steps
of the altar and approached the king, who rose respectfully
to receive him. Ralph angrily inquired who had placed
the crown on his head. The king, displeased by the
interruption, answered evasively. " Whoever has done this,
has done it against right and justice," said the archbishop,
" nor as long as the crown remains on your head will I proceed
with the office I have begun." Henry good-naturedly
removed his crown, which was fastened by a clasp under his
chin, and the archbishop, at the earnest request of the people,
replaced it on the king's head.10 The ceremony then proceeded.
9 Ibid., 1 121.
10 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontificum, p. 379.
153
11
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Mention is made of several prelates whom the archbishop
consecrated during the last year of his life. In 1122 he was
again attacked by paralysis, and died on October 20. He was
buried in Christ Church. Many of his letters are extant, and
a. collection of his homilies is preserved in the Bodleian
Library.
154
36.— WILLIAM DE CORBEIL, 1123 to 1136.
Kings of England : Henry I., 1100 to 11 35.
Stephen, 1 135 to n 54.
About four months after the death of Archbishop Ralph,
Henry I. summoned an ecclesiastical council to meet at
Gloucester for the purpose of electing a new primate. After
a violent altercation between the monks and the secular
clergy, in which the king appears to have taken no share,
William de Corbeil, a secular canon, was appointed to the
archiepiscopal see. The monks disapproved of this choice,
and the archbishop was consequently involved in quarrels
with them during the whole of his episcopate.
William is believed to have been born at the small town
of Corbeil on the Seine, between Paris and Melun, but nothing
is known concerning his parentage. After studying at Laon,
he became tutor in the family of Ranulf, the chancellor of
King Henry I. Later, he was made chaplain to the infamous
Ralph Flambard, Bishop of Durham, to whose evil influence
are imputed many of the misdeeds of Rufus. In this capacity,
he was present, in 1104, at the translation of the body of
St. Cuthbert to the new cathedral at Durham1 (vide Ralph
d'Escures). Simeon of Durham states that notwithstanding
his connection with Flambard, William was a friend of St-
Anselm.
A house for regular canons of the order of St. Augustine had
been founded by Richard de Belmeis, Bishop of London, at
Chich in Essex, on the site of the old nunnery of St. Osyth.
Of this house, William de Corbeil became the first prior.3
His election to the see of Canterbury took place on February
2, 1123.
Thurstan, Archbishop of York, offered to consecrate the
primate-elect, but was informed that he would be permitted
1 Hook's Lives of the Archbishops, II., 303.
2 Henry of Huntingdon's Chronicle, 1122.
155
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to do so only on the condition that he acknowledged William
as primate of all England. He refused, and the controversy
concerning the supremacy of the see of Canterbury was
renewed {vide Ralph d'Escures). William was consecrated by
his own suffragans.3
Though certain writers state that he was very religious,
learned and affable, Henry of Huntingdon declares that
" nothing can be said of his merits because he had none. "
The anonymous author of the " Acts of Stephen " charges
him with greed and hypocrisy, but it is possible that these
writers were prejudiced against him by the monks.
Early in Lent William set out for Rome to obtain the
pallium ; but on his arrival found that Thurstan had got there
three days before him, and had persuaded the pope to take
his side in the controversy. The pope had been given to
understand that William had received the archbishopric from
the king in opposition to the monks of Canterbury, and against
right. William is said to have been forced to pay a large
sum of money before he could persuade the pope to bestow on
him the pallium.4 The cause of Thurstan was fully in-
vestigated, and though the recorded evidence is conflicting,
he appears to have been unable to produce the necessary
documents to prove that his see had equal rights with that
of Canterbury.
After the return of both prelates to England a papal legate,
Cardinal John of Crema, was permitted by Henry I. to pass
through England on his way to Scotland. John had an inte-
view with King David of Scotland at Roxburgh, and delivered
to him a papal letter, announcing the triumph of Calixtus II.
over the anti-pope Gregory. On his return to England,
the legate presided at a great ecclesiastical council, held
at Westminster on September 9, 1125. Seventeen decrees
were passed, chiefly against simony, usury and the marriage
of priests.5
The presidency of the papal legate at this council was deeply
resented by many English churchmen, who held that England
had thus received grievous offence in the humiliation of the
3 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pont., p. 380.
t Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1123.
4 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1125.
156
William de Corbeil
see of Canterbury. After the legate's departure, it was
decided that Archbishop William should again visit Rome,
to consult with the pope concerning the legatine authority.
William was honourably received by Pope Honorius II., who
had succeeded Calixtus. The pope decided to confer legatine
authority on William himself, and issued a bull which made
him vicar-general and legate of the apostolic see in England
and Scotland.6 This was a great triumph for the see of
Canterbury, for, as papal legate, William would exercise
authority over his rival at York. While this arrangement
brought the English Church into closer union with Rome,
it did not offend the English people as the presence of a foreign
prelate had done.
Thurstan was not yet prepared, however, to resign his
claims. At a court held at Windsor the following Christmas,
he appeared dressed in his archiepiscopal robes, preceded
by his cross-bearer, and declared that he had an equal right
with the Archbishop of Canterbury to place the crown on
the king's head. But King Henry, who invariably supported
William, ordered Thurstan and his cross-bearer to be turned
out of the royal chapel. A few years later, Thurstan seems
to have been on more friendly terms with William, whom he
consulted concerning the restoration of order in the abbey
of St. Mary's, York.
The new cathedral of Christ Church, Canterbury, which
had been begun by Lanfranc, and enlarged by Anselm, was
consecrated by Archbishop William on May 4, 1130. The
ceremony, which was attended with great pomp, was compared
by contemporary writers to that which took place at the
dedication of Solomon's Temple.7 The kings of England
and Scotland and a vast concourse of bishops, clergy and nobles
were present.
King Henry I. having lost his only son, caused the
bishops and feudal lords to take a solemn oath to support
the succession of his daughter Matilda to the throne of
England. Archbishop William had been one of the first to
take this oath, but was easily persuaded after the king's
death to desert the cause of Matilda and to crown Henry's
nephew Stephen. Though he is recorded to have at first
6 Ibid. 7 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pont., p. 382.
157
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
shown some hesitation when required to break his oath,
he weakly accepted the improbable statement, made by
one of Stephen's partisans, that Henry on his deathbed had
released the lords from their promise to support Matilda."8
A few months after Stephen's coronation, William is said to
have withdrawn himself from the court, being offended
because he was not placed in the position of honour at the
king's right hand on the occasion of the Easter festival.
A serious quarrel arose between Archbishop William and
the monks of Christ Church concerning the church of St.
Martin at Dover, which had been given by the king to the
new cathedral at Canterbury. William had turned out the
secular clergy, who were accused of evil living, replacing
them by Augustinian canons from Merton Abbey. A
party led by one of the monks named Jeremias, violently
opposed this change, declaring that St. Martin's belonged to
the monks of Christ Church. William's death is said to have
been hastened by his being suddenly summoned from his
palace at Mortlake to Dover, in order to protect the new
canons from the violence of the monks.9
The archbishop was also involved in quarrels with Hugh,
Abbot of St. Augustine's, and Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln.
On account of the almost continuous disputes which occupied
his pontificate, he has been nicknamed by some writers, William
of Turmoil.
He died at Canterbury on November 21, 1136, and was
buried in his cathedral church. The author of the "Acts of
Stephen" states that at William's death the king's officers
found enormous sums secretly hoarded in his coffers, which
would have been better distributed to the poor. The great
keep of Rochester Castle was built by Archbishop William.
8 Acts of Stephen, Bohn's edition, p. 328.
"* Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pont., I. 287.
158
37— THEOBALD, 1138 to 1161.
Kings of England : Stephen, 1135 to 1154.
Henry II., 1154 to 1189.
The prelate whose history we are now briefly to relate justly
deserves the honour of being ranked among the best and
ablest archbishops of Canterbury. Like two of his most
illustrious predecessors, Lanfranc and Anselm, Theobald came
from the abbey of Bee, where he had honourably held the
offices, first of prior and afterwards of abbot. He belonged
to a knightly family of Norman extraction, who had settled
near Thierceville, in the neighbourhood of Bec-Hellouin.
Two years had already elapsed since the death of Arch-
bishop William, when, at the invitation of King Stephen and
his Queen Matilda, Theobald came to England. It was in
December, 1138, that Stephen, at the request of a papal legate,
Alberic, Bishop of Ostra, who was then in England, sum-
moned a council to meet in London to deal with certain
ecclesiastical reforms, and to appoint a new archbishop of
Canterbury.1
The king's brother, Henry, Bishop of Winchester, who was
then the most powerful churchman in England, hoped to
secure the primacy, and had obtained the promise of the legate
to further his designs in this respect. But Stephen, who had
reason to distrust the loyalty of his brother, determined to
appoint an archbishop of his own choice, and accordingly
invited the abbot of Bee to come to England. The chapter
of Canterbury approved the king's choice, and on December 24
Theobald was elected archbishop. He was consecrated by
the legate on January 9, 1139, and a few weeks later set out
to Rome to seek the pallium.
The schemes of Bishop Henry to obtain the primacy being
thus defeated, he determined to increase his own power by
other means. After considerable intrigue, he succeeded
in persuading the pope to confer on him legatine power in
1 Henry of Huntingdon's Chronicle, 1138.
159
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
England. This division of authority increased the difficulty
of Theobald's position. Henry now claimed supremacy
in all ecclesiastical matters, and encouraged the monks
to appeal to him against the primate, thus undermining
the authority of the latter. He also held his own courts to
deal with ecclesiastical disputes, permitting no appeal from
thence except to Rome, and even consecrated bishops
without the consent of Theobald. In September, 1143, Henry
consecrated William Fitzherbert to the archbishopric of York,
through Theobald had opposed his election.8
Jeremias, Prior of Christ Church, who had been deposed by
Theobald for insubordination, went to Rome with the sanction
of Bishop Henry to make his appeal against the archbishop.
The pope ordered him to be reinstated in his office, and
Theobald was forced to submit. Henry also attempted to
convert Winchester into a metropolitan see, and is said to
have obtained a pallium from the pope. The moderation and
patience displayed by Archbishop Theobald in face of these
humiliations was by no means due to weakness. He knew
that Henry's legatine power would expire on the death of
the pope who had conferred it, and he was meantime content
to bide his time. Acting on his legatine authority Bishop
Henry summoned his brother, King Stephen, before an eccle-
siastical council to answer a charge of having confiscated
the estates of three bishops who had been accused of treason.
The decision of the suit was left to the Archbishop of Rouen,
who came to England on purpose to hear the case, and who
decided in favour of Stephen.3
The death of Pope Innocent II. in September, 1143,
put an end to Henry's legatine authority, which the two
succeeding popes wisely refused to renew. It was not
long before Henry deserted the cause of his brother Stephen
for that of Matilda of Anjou, the daughter of Henry II.
(vide William de Corbeil). The English people had looked
to Stephen to restore order in the kingdom, but this he was
incapable of doing. Though a brave soldier he was lacking
in determination, and constantly yielded when he ought to
have been firm. The fierce barons, over whom he had no
2 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontificutn, p. 385.
3 William of Malmesbury, Historia Novella, p. 550.
160
Theobald
control, built strong castles throughout the country, and
grievously oppressed the poor. Robbers infested the roads
so that there was no safety for travellers, and even the churches
were stripped of their treasures.
When, in the midst of this anarchy, Matilda of Anjou landed
in England, the people who had previously refused to place
a woman on the throne flocked to her standard. In 1141,
after the battle of Lincoln, in which Stephen was defeated
and taken prisoner, Archbishop Theobald was required to
take an oath of fealty to Matilda, but he refused to do so until
he had received the consent of King Stephen.4 Matilda was
recognized not as queen, but as " Lady of the English." Soon
however, her arrogant temper alienated from her many of her
supporters. Theobald and other prelates who had joined her
were besieged with her in Winchester by the king's party.
Matilda, with her followers, escaped, and the prelates in
headlong flight succeeded in reaching places of safety.5
After the restoration of Stephen, Theobald returned to his
allegiance to the king, but openly declared that he would
sanction no proceedings to secure the succession to Stephen's
family.
Theobald took great pleasure in the society of learned men,
and gathered around him at Canterbury a number of dis-
tinguished scholars. John of Salisbury, afterwards bishop
of Chartres, the most distinguished classical scholar of
his time, was introduced to Theobald by Bernard of Clair-
vaux, probably about the year 1148, and afterwards
acted as the archbishop's secretary until the death of the
latter. About the year 1142 Thomas a Becket (q.v.) was
introduced to Theobald, and obtained a place in his household.
The archbishop was not slow to recognize the merit of Thomas,
whom he treated with the greatest confidence. Through
Theobald's influence the study of civil and canon law was
introduced into England. He invited to England the famous
jurist, Vicarius of Mantua, and appointed him to teach juris-
prudence at Oxford.6
In November, 1143, Theobald went to Rome, accompanied
by Thomas a Becket, to consult the pope concerning his
* Ibid., p. 573. * Acts of Stephen, Bohn's edition.
6 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pontificum, p. 385.
l6l
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
quarrel with the monks of Canterbury. Pope Lucius II.
espoused his cause, and, on his return to England, Jeremias
was forced to resign the priorate of Christ Church.
In March, 1148, Pope Eugenius III. convened a great council
at Rheims, to which he summoned the bishops of England,
Germany, France and Spain. King Stephen forbade the
English bishops to attend. Hearing that Theobald and certain
other prelates proposed to go without his sanction, he ordered
the sea-ports to be watched. Theobald and Becket made
their way to the coast, and, eluding the vigilance of the king's
officers, crossed to France in a crazy fishing-boat. On his
arrival at Rheims the archbishop received a warm welcome
from Pope Eugenius III., who laughingly declared that his
manner of crossing the Channel had been "more of a swim
than a sail" ("qui natando magis quam navigando dictus est
advenisse").7
It was probably at this council, or shortly afterwards,
that Pope Eugenius, on the advice of Bernard of Clairvaux,
conferred on Theobald legatine authority in England. The
pope is said to have intended to excommunicate Stephen at
the council, but Theobald dissuaded him from doing so.
On his return to England Theodore found that the revenues of
his see had been seized by the king, and he was ordered to leave
the country. His banishment was not, however, of long
duration. Pope Eugenius on hearing of it threatened to
excommunicate Stephen, and to place England under an
interdict, if the archbishop was not immediately recalled.
This greatly alarmed Stephen, who was very devout, and
when shortly afterwards Theobald returned to England,
Stephen, on the advice of his Queen, Matilda, was easily
persuaded to become reconciled with him.8 Theobald's
position was now secure, and his power continued to increase
during the remainder of Stephen's reign. He induced the
weak king to found several monasteries, and to bestow
many benefactions on the Church.
The archbishop's troubles with the monks were not
yet ended, however. In 1152, he refused to give the
benediction to Silvester, the new abbot of St. Augustine's,
except in Christ Church. Silvester appealed to the pope,
* Ibid., Opera, I. 75. 8 Ibid., p. 136.
162
Theobald
who ordered Theobald to bestow the benediction in the
church of St. Augustine's monastery. He was proceeding
thither for the purpose when, by arrangement, he was met
by the prior of Christ .Church, who claimed the right
to forbid him to bless an abbot except in the cathedral.
Another appeal was made to the pope, with the result that
Theobald was ordered to give the benediction in St. Augus-
tine's. Anastasius IV., the successor of Pope Eugenius,
afterwards ordered Silvester to profess obedience to Theobald.9
A quarrel also arose between the archbishop and the monks
of Christ Church, whose financial affairs had fallen into serious
disorder. At their own request Theobald undertook the
management of their revenues, but he was afterwards accused
by them of parsimony and of appropriating part of the funds
to his own use. Deeply indignant on account of this unjust
charge, he ordered several of the monks to be im-
prisoned, and sent the prior Walter to confinement in the
abbey of Gloucester, where he remained until after the arch-
bishop's death. In his place Theobald chose a worthier
prior.10
In 1152 Stephen summoned a council at London, and com-
manded Theobald to crown his son Eustace as his successor.
Theobald refused on the ground that the pope had forbidden
him to do so. The king in great wrath ordered Theobald
and his partisans to be imprisoned, but the archbishop escaped
and fled to Flanders. Again the pope threatened the king
with excommunication and the kingdom with interdict if
the archbishop were not recalled. Stephen was forced to
yield, and Theobald was restored to his see."
In the following year Prince Henry, the son of Matilda of
Anjou was invited by Archbishop Theobald to come to England
to put an end to the disorder in the kingdom. Henry landed in
England with an army, but no fighting took place, for the
barons on both sides set on foot a treaty of peace. By the
treaty of Wallingford, which is said to have been largely the
work of Theobald, it was agreed that Stephen should continue
to reign during his lifetime, and that after his death the English
crown should go to Prince Henry.
9 Ibid., p. 76. ,0 Actus Pontificum, p. 386.
" Opera, p. 135.
163
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
After the death of Stephen, in 1154, Theobald crowned
Henry II. and his queen at Westminster. Soon after his
accession Henry, on the primate's recommendation, bestowed
on Becket the important office of chancellor. The archbishop
hoped that Becket's influence would be exercised to support
the extensive privileges which the Church had obtained from
Stephen. But in this he was disappointed. Though Becket
remained on friendly terms with his old patron, he subordin-
ated the interests of the Church to those of the king. On
more than one occasion, Theobald had reason to disapprove
of Henry's policy with regard to ecclesiastical matters.
In the spring of 1161, Theobald became seriously ill. The
king and Thomas were then in Normandy. Theobald wrote
begging that Thomas might be sent to him, but the chan-
cellor was occupied in the king's affairs and did not go.
Theodore's last public appearance was at the consecration of
Richard Peche, Bishop of Lichfield. The archbishop was too
ill to officiate, but he was carried to his private chapel to
witness the ceremony, which was performed by his brother
Walter, Bishop of Rochester." He died on April 11, 1161.
In his will he earnestly commended the church of Canter-
bury to the care of King Henry, and the English people
and requested that his private fortune might be distributed
to the poor, if the king so permitted.
In 1787, some workmen who were engaged in levelling
part of the old pavement in Canterbury cathedral came upon
a coffin which contained a skeleton. An inscription found on
a piece of lead inside proved that the bones were those of
Archbishop Theobald.
As a statesman Theobald was possessed of unusual ability ;
as a scholar he was quick to recognize scholarship and to
protect talent wherever he found it ; as a churchman he was
courageous, merciful and patient, even when deeply wronged.
While remaining loyal to King Stephen, he did not scruple
to oppose him at the cost of exile to himself, when such
opposition was for the good of Church or State.
" Ibid, p. 168.
164
4 Fifura Scrintf S Thoma? Cantuartenfis ex iS^S
|* B±blwth.eca Cottomona clefumpta
„ open
snuiiebanteUgiK
'nejT fibula. ,
[clinodia aurea
moia.aureis
aminis tecTa,
vincnlisdeama
is nexa.,jirom«s
infuperanrekino-
[iiliftisvtpote,Ge
liora ima/ucul»s
jfnilifipie decern
inJa,autcluocbfi
amram aream
compolitis.
SpcJuiKeciacra
cflks binas.tpales
rvxK fex aut oclo
. jbuftiftmii e
Jenrpio deporiar<
valebant, imp! eve
runt
Gcmam niiVtiiT, i
vna,cnm Anwlo
earn indigiiante,
craam (iafliarum
Rex. obttrltt.Hen
itte annulo
nferuitKinpoBi-
"" ce rapaci
^eftavit .
Loculus itle, tjuem vides
~--eum-. oiiaThaJBeckellt
caWajWcnon. jrapta
i cratuf parte cruse
.mortem inferebat
xompie clebaUii-.
£\»- I OMOJUK
SHRINE OF ST. THOMAS A BECKET.
{Formerly in Canterbury Cathedral. Destroyed by order of Henry VIII. in 1538.)
38.— THOMAS A BECKET1 1162 to 1170. S.
King of England : Henry II., 1154 to 1189.
Thomas a Becket, better known in his own day as Thomas
of London, was born in his father's house in Cheapside in the
city of London on Tuesday, December 21, probably in the
year 11 18. He was baptized on the evening of the same day
in the church of St. Mary Cole, receiving the name of the
Apostle on whose festival he was born. His parents, Gilbert
and Matilda a Becket, who were both of Norman birth, had
settled in London some years previously. The story that his
mother was a Saracen is now proved to be legendary. Gilbert
followed the trade of a merchant, first at Rouen and after-
wards in London, where he held for some time the important
office of portreeve.
Strange stories were afterwards preserved by the monks
concerning dreams and visions which Matilda is said to have
had before and after her son's birth. One night she went to
look at the infant in his cradle, and found him sleeping beneath
a blood-red quilt so large that England could not hold it.
At the age of ten, Thomas was sent to the Augustinians
at Merton Priory, in Surrey, to learn letters and good behaviour.
The boy was high-spirited, of a quick temper and devoted
to outdoor sports more than to study. He, however, learned
to write and speak fluent Latin. On leaving Merton he was
sent to a school in London whence he proceeded to the Uni-
versity of Paris, where he studied rhetoric and theology.
Among the rough and boisterous youths who thronged the
schools he was subjected to many coarse temptations, but
then as in later days his worst enemies were unable to bring
the shadow of a charge against the spotless purity of his life.
At the age of twenty-one he was recalled to England, and
1 The contemporary authorities consulted are all to be found in
Robertson's Materials for the History of Thomas Becket. 7 vols. (Rolls
series).
165
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
his parents being now in reduced circumstances he accepted
the post of notary, first in the household of Richer de l'Aigle,
lord of Pevensey, and afterwards to his kinsman Osbert
Huitdeniers, one of the sheriffs of London.2 About the year
1 142 he was introduced by two friends of his father to Theobald,
Archbishop of Canterbury, and obtained a place in the
primate's household. There in spite of the enmity of the
archdeacon, Roger Pont l'Eveque, he soon won favour with
Theobald, who recognized his capabilities and treated him
with the greatest confidence. In 1143 he had the honour
of being chosen to accompany the archbishop to Rome. It
was probably shortly after their return that he was sent for
a year, at Theobald's expense, to study canon law at Bologna
and Auxerre.
In 1148, when Theobald, in face of the king's prohibition,
escaped to Normandy in an open boat to attend the council
of Rheims, Thomas was his companion. Two years later
he was sent to Rome on an important mission, and succeeded
in persuading the pope to enforce the arrangement by which
Henry, son of Matilda of Anjou, should succeed to the throne
of England.
His personal appearance at this time is described by one
of his biographers. He was tall and slim of growth, with
a pale complexion, dark hair, and straightly featured face.
" Blithe of countenance was he, winning and lovable in all
conversation, fluent of speech in his discourse, but slightly
stuttering in his talk ; so keen of discernment that he could
always make difficult questions plain after a wise manner,
and of such wondrous strong memory that whatever he had
heard of sentences and law, afterwards he could cite it at
whatever time he chose to give it forth."
In 1 154, after taking deacon's orders, Thomas was appointed
to the archdeaconry of Canterbury in succession to his old
enemy Roger, who had been made archbishop of York. From
this time honours were crowded on him. He was made
dean of Hastings, keeper of the Tower of London, and
warden of the castles of Berkhampstead and Eye. In the
following year Henry II. on the primate's recommendation
bestowed on him the important office of chancellor of England.
2 Edward Grim, Vita Sanctis Thomce, I. 361.
166
Thomas a Becket
The wealth attached to this position was enormous, and
Thomas now became the most powerful man in England
next to the king. Daily he entertained a crowd of guests
in his palace. His table shone with gold and silver vessels,
and was loaded with costly meats. Though the king was
twelve years his junior a close friendship grew up between
them. When their work was over for the day, they are said
to have played together like two schoolboys. The king
was fond of playing rough jokes on Thomas, who is said to
have taken these in good part. There is a story that one day
when the king and Thomas were out riding together, they
met a ragged beggar. Henry snatched from his chancellor's
shoulders a magnificent mantle of scarlet cloth lined with fur,
and threw it to the beggar, saying in jest : " This time, Thomas,
you will have the merit of clothing the naked."
Becket loyally supported the king in his work of judicial re-
form and in his schemes to diminish the power of the barons . In
1158 when he was sent as ambassador to France, he amazed the
French people by the magnificence of his retinue, and by the
splendid procession of wagons and pack-horses required to
carry his baggage, " If this be the chancellor, what must the
king of England be like ? " they said.
In the following year, when Henry made an expedition to
Toulouse, Thomas accompanied him at the head of a body
of 700 knights armed at his own expense.3 The chancellor
was foremost in the fight and unhorsed many French knights
of great reputation. To pay the expenses of this expedition,
Henry levied a tax known as scutage, which was payable
both by the clergy and the laity. When the clergy rebelled
on account of this tax, the chancellor supported the king
against them.
In 1161 Archbishop Theobald died. Henry, believing
that his friend the chancellor would support him as faithfully
in reforming the Church as he had done in reforming the
State, determined to make him archbishop. From the first
Thomas drew back in alarm, and is said to have warned the
king that his election to the primacy would put an end to their
friendship. But Henry, who did not believe him to be in
earnest, refused to be moved from his purpose.
1 Herbert of Boseham, Vita S. Thoma, III., p. 176.
167
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
He was ordained to the priesthood by his friend Walter,
Bishop of Rochester, on the eve of Whitsunday, 1162, and was
consecrated eight days later by Henry de Blois, Bishop of
Winchester. His first act was to appoint the day of his con-
secration a festival in honour of the Holy Trinity. The feast
of the Trinity had previously been kept at different periods of
the year in different churches, but from Becket's time it has
constantly been observed on the same day throughout the
English Church.
At the king's request Thomas was permitted by the pope to
send for the pallium instead of going to Rome to receive it, and
on August 8, he went barefoot to meet the envoy who brought
it. From the day of his appointment to the primacy he
seems to have determined to serve the Church as faithfully as
he had served the king, and to defend it at all costs against
secular encroachments. Contrary to the wish of the king, he
resigned the chancellorship. Henry, annoyed on hearing
this, sent a message to ask why he had not also resigned
the archdeaconry of Canterbury, and ordered him to do so.
Thomas also laid aside all his magnificence, lived on the
simplest fare, and clothed himself as a poor monk with a hair
shirt next his skin.4
The first act of Thomas which aroused Henry's serious dis-
pleasure was the excommunication of William of Eynsford,
a tenant in chief of the crown, who had refused to present
a nominee of the archbishop to a living of which he was the
patron. Thomas also demanded the restoration of all the
alienated property of his see, including the estates held by
the crown. At a council held at Woodstock in 1163 he opposed
a project of the king to transfer to the royal treasury a tax
which had been hitherto payable to the sheriffs from their
respective shires.5
But the chief subject of dispute between the king and
Thomas concerned the ecclesiastical courts established in the
time of William the Conqueror. Henry complained that in
these courts clergy convicted of serious crimes were treated
with too great leniency. The privilege of being tried in the
church courts had been extended not only to the clergy but
* Edward Grim, Vita Sancta Thomce, II., 368.
s Ibid., p. 373.
168
Thomas a Becket
to all scholars, and the ability to read and write was often
sufficient to protect a man from being tried by the ordinary
law.
Henry determined to put an end to this travesty of justice,
and ordered all clerics convicted of crime in the church courts
to be handed over to the king's officers for punishment. The
archbishop seems to have given a verbal promise to agree to
the arrangement, but Henry did not consider this to be
sufficient. He accordingly summoned all the bishops to meet
him at Clarendon, in Wiltshire, on January 13, 1164, to give
their formal consent to his ecclesiastical reforms. Sixteen
decrees, afterwards known as the Constitutions of Clarendon,
all of which had been in force in the time of the Conqueror,
but had fallen into disuse, were drawn up. Those which
chiefly affected ecclesiastical privileges were as follows :
(1) Disputes concerning presentation to benefices shall be
treated and determined in the king's court. (2) Clergy
accused of theft, violence or any such crime shall appear first
in the king's court and afterwards in the ecclesiastical court.
If convicted the Church shall not protect them. (3) Arch-
bishops, bishops and other prelates shall not leave the kingdom
without the king's consent. (This decree restricted appeals
to Rome). (4) No tenant in chief of the king or officer of
his household shall be excommunicated or his lands be placed
under interdict without the king's consent. (5) Appoint-
ments to archbishoprics, bishoprics, abbeys or priories shall be
made by the bishops with the king's assent, and the elect
shall do homage to the king as their liege lord for life and
limb and for their temporal honours, saving their order, before
they shall be consecrated.
Though the accounts given by different writers are con-
tradictory, it appears that Thomas was supported by the
assembled bishops in refusing to give his consent to the Con-
stitutions. On this the barons, who were on the king's side,
raised a great clamour, swords were drawn, and the bishops
were threatened with violence if they refused to give way.
The archbishop asked leave to withdraw for a space to
take counsel with himself. In the interval he had an interview
with two Knights Templars who were said to have been envoys
from the pope. On returning to the council Thomas declared
169
12
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
that he was willing to accept the Constitutions. To the bishops
be said : — " If it be my lord's will that I perjure myself for
the present, I will venture perjury that I may do penance for
it hereafter."
Certain writers suppose this to mean that the pope had
advised Thomas to avoid a quarrel with the king by tem-
porizing. The subsequent conduct of the archbishop does
not, however, bear out this supposition. Though he had
promised to consent to the Constitutions he refused to sign
them, and departed from the council much depressed. On
his return to Canterbury he suspended himself from the
service of the altar as an act of penance, until the pope should
absolve him from his sin. Twice he embarked for France
without the king's consent, but the sailors, recognizing him
and fearing Henry's displeasure, pleaded contrary winds and
turned back.6
Meantime the king proceeded to enforce the Constitutions
by punishing a number of clergy who had been convicted of
crime. Thomas, on hearing of this, withdrew his consent to
the Constitutions, and interfered on behalf of the condemned
clerics.
The king now determined to depose Thomas from the arch-
bishopric. In October he convened another council at
Northampton Castle, at which he ordered the archbishop to
appear to answer certain charges brought against him. Thomas
came attended by a retinue of knights, and was entertained
at St. Andrew's monastery. He was ordered to account for
certain sums of money which had passed through his hands
when he was chancellor. He requested that reasonable time
should be given him to draw up a statement, but this was
refused, and he was ordered to pay a sum of 30,000 marks.
The archbishop took these accusations against his honesty
so deeply to heart that he fell sick,7 and the council was
adjourned for three days owing to his illness. The bishops,
who had now deserted his side, advised him either to throw
himself unreservedly on the king's mercy or to resign the
archbishopric. But Thomas refused to yield, and threatened
to appeal against them to the pope.
* Edward Grim, Vita S. Thomce, II., 383, 389.
7 Ibid., p. 392.
170
Thomas a Becket
On the morning of the last day of the council he celebrated
the solemn mass of St. Stephen in which are the words :
" The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers took counsel
together, against the Lord and against his anointed." He
then put on a black stole and cap, mounted his palfrey, and
surrounded by a crowd of beggars rode at a foot's pace to the
castle. Carrying his cross in front of him, he entered the hall
where the bishops were assembled, and took a seat at the upper
end of the room. The king had withdrawn with his barons to
an inner chamber. Messages passed between him and the
bishops, who again advised the archbishop to resign his see.
After a prolonged dispute Becket was impeached for high
treason. Henry sent the Earl of Leicester to pronounce
sentence on him. But the archbishop refused to hear him.
" I will be judged under God and the pope alone, to whom,
in your presence, I appeal," he said. " I forbid you under
anathema to pronounce your sentence." Then having
summoned the bishops to answer for their conduct before the
pope, he passed through their midst, still carrying his cross,
and so left the hall. To the many threats and insults flung
at him as he went, he did not scruple to retort with fury, but
he was permitted to depart unharmed.
That night, however, fear seized him, and he fled secretly
from the monastery. As soon as his flight became known
the king issued an order that he was not to be molested,
but of this he knew nothing. Travelling only by night and
in disguise, under the name of Brother Dearman, he at length
reached Sandwich, where he embarked for Flanders on
November 2.8 He was honourably received by King
Louis VII. of France, who provided him with funds, and an
escort with which he set out to visit the pope.
At the time of the archbishop's arrival in France Pope
Alexander III. was at Sens, having been driven from Rome
by the party of an antipope. Thomas proceeded to Sens, and
on November 23, threw himself at the feet of the pope.9
Alexander condemned certain of the Constitutions of
Clarendon, and refused to accept Thomas's resignation of his
see. He was unwilling, however to quarrel with Henry II.,
8 Ibid., p. 399.
9 Ibid., p. 406.
171
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
who had acknowledged him as lawful pope, and from whom
he received supplies of money.
In the spring of 1166, the pope gave Thomas leave to
to take whatever measures he might please against the king.
Thomas then determined to excommunicate Henry, but on
the evening of the day he had fixed for doing so, he received
news that the king was ill. He, therefore, contented himself
with excommunicating seven of Henry's counsellors, and
publicly repeating his threat to excommunicate the king if
he refused to give way.
Meantime the king had confiscated the property of the see
of Canterbury, and had driven into exile all Becket's relatives,
friends and dependents to the number of about four hundred
persons. They arrived half-starving in France in the depth
of winter, but through the kindness of the French king received
shelter and the necessaries of life in different monasteries.10
For two years Thomas was hospitably entertained in the
Cistercian monastery at Pontigny. At length Henry sent a
message to the abbot informing him that if he continued longer
to shelter the archbishop, all the Cistercians would be driven
from England and Normandy.11 Thomas then removed to
Sens, where he lived under the protection of the French king
during the remainder of his exile.
For six years the archbishop remained in France. During
that time several attempts were made by the king of France
and the pope to mediate in the quarrel with Henry, but with
little result. Many letters passed between Henry and Becket,
and two meetings took place between them in Normandy in
the presence of the French king. Thomas promised to submit
to Henry in all things " saving God's honour," but these
words served to irritate Henry and his nobles.
At length the pope threatened Henry with excommunica-
tion if he refused to make peace with the archbishop. On
July 22, 1170, another meeting took place between them at
Freteval between Chartres and Tours.12 The subject of the
Constitutions was not mentioned. Henry professed himself
willing to be guided by the archbishop's counsel as to the
10 Herbert of Boseham, Vita S. Thomcs, III., 375.
11 Edward Grim, Vita S. Thomce, II., 413.
12 Herbert of Boseham, Vita S. Thomce, III., 465.
172
Thomas a Becket
amends due to the see of Canterbury, for the recent violation
of its rights. A hollow peace was thus made between them,
and it was arranged that Thomas should return to his see.
In the previous June Henry, with a view to consolidating his
power in England, had caused his eldest son, Prince Henry, to be
crowned as his colleague and successor by Roger, Archbishop
of York, assisted by the bishops of Durham, London, Rochester
and Salisbury. This violation of the rights of his see roused
in Becket the strongest resentment. At Freteval no definite
arrangement seems to have been made with regard to the
amends due, and Becket is believed to have kept silence as
to the steps he had already taken. Some writers state, how-
ever, that the king had been informed of his intentions.
On hearing of the prince's coronation the archbishop had lost
no time in applying to the pope for letters ordering the
suspension of Roger of York and the excommunication
of the bishops who had assisted him. Before setting out
for England Thomas secretly despatched a boy, in a
small vessel which attracted no attention, with the letters of
excommunication.13
On December i , the archbishop landed at Sandwich. He was
met by the sheriff of Kent and other officials, who demanded
that he should absolve the excommunicated bishops. Thomas
haughtily replied that the letters had been issued with the
king's permission. Next morning he set out for Canterbury.
His ride through Kent was one long triumphal procession.
" Old men, women and children lined the roads on their knees
to beg his blessing. Clergy came at the head of their
parishioners with garlands and banners, and with choirs
chanting anthems. It was evening when he reached Can-
terbury, and he went straight to the cathedral. His face
shone as he entered like the face of Moses when he descended
from the mount. He seated himself on the throne and the
monks came one by one and kissed him. Tears were in all
eyes." " My lord," Herbert of Boseham14 whispered to him,
" it matters not now when you depart hence. Christ has
'3 Ibid., p. 471.
H Herbert de Boseham, who afterwards wrote a life of Becket, is
said to have been his secretary.
173
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
conquered. Christ is now king." " He looked at me," says
Herbert, " but he did not speak."15
Thomas found that the king's promise to restore the property
of his see had not been carried out, owing to the excom-
munication of the bishops. His estates were in the hands of
the De Broc family, men of evil repute who oppressed the
people of Kent. One of the archbishop's first acts after his
return was to excommunicate the De Brocs.
After spending a few days at Canterbury he set out to visit
Prince Henry, who was then at Winchester. But on reaching
London he received in the name of the prince a message
from the courtiers ordering him to return to Canterbury.
On Christmas Day Becket preached in Canterbury Cathedral
on the text : " Peace on earth to men of good will." There
was no peace, he said, except to men of good will. He spoke
passionately of the troubles of the Church and referred to the
possibility of his own martyrdom. The congregation sobbed
around him.16 At the close of the service he again solemnly
excommunicated the De Broc family.
Meantime Archbishop Roger had crossed to Normandy
to inform King Henry of the bishops' excommunication.
On hearing the tale, Henry flew into one of the terrible
passions of wrath to which he frequently gave way. " Are
there none of the cowards eating my bread who will free me
from this turbulent priest ? " he exclaimed. Four knights
who heard him looked at each other, and then quietly left the
hall. Their names were Reginald Fitzurse, William de Tracy,
Hugh de Morville and Richard le Breton.
Without delay they set out for England, travelling secretly
and by different routes. On the afternoon of December 29,
they reached Canterbury, and forced their way into the
monastery, where Becket was seated quietly conversing with
his monks. They called on him to absolve the excommunicated
bishops, but he haughtily refused. After a stormy altercation
the knights withdrew, to return with an armed forced supplied
by the De Brocs.
The monks urged Thomas to flee, but he scorned their
«* Herbert of Boseham, Vita S. Thoma III., p. 479 ; Froude's Short
Studies, vol. IV., p. 139.
«6 Ibid., IV., p. 159.
174
Thomas a Becket
fears. When the bell rang for vespers he proceeded as usual
to the cathedral, and refused to allow the doors to be shut.
" The church of God shall not be made a fortress," he said.
Vespers had already commenced when the archbishop arrived.
A few minutes later the knights with their armed followers
entered the dimly-lit church. " Where is the traitor, Thomas
a Becket ? " they shouted. There was silence. " Where is
the archbishop ? " " Here am I, no traitor, but archbishop
and a priest of God," said Thomas, as he came forward and
faced them. Again they called on him to absolve the bishops,
but he refused. All the monks and clergy forsook him and
fled, except Edward Grim, a priest of Cambridge, who was
severely wounded whilst attempting to defend him.
On the pavement beneath the steps of the altar the
assassins slew him with their swords. " I am prepared to
die for Christ and for His Church," were his last words.
On the following day the body of the murdered prelate
was buried by the monks, without any religious service, in the
crypt of the desecrated cathedral. There it remained until
1220, when it was translated to a magnificent shrine before
the high altar.
A tremendous reaction followed this deed of blood. The
news of the archbishop's murder filled all Europe with horror,
and King Henry on receiving it was for a time completely
stunned. Forgetting the bitter quarrel that had separated
him from the archbishop, the passionate king wept for the
friend of his youth. Fearing that his own excommunication
and an interdict in his dominions would follow, he hastened
to send ambassadors to the pope, protesting his innocence
of any share in Becket's murder. In 1174 King Henry did
penance at the archbishop's tomb, and in token of repentance
for his share in the murder was publicly flogged by the monks.
Almost immediately after the murder the archbishop's
tomb became a place of pilgrimage, and innumerable miracles
are said to have been wrought there. For the next three
centuries pilgrims from all parts of the world flocked to
Canterbury. Phials containing a minute drop of the martyr's
blood mixed with water were brought thence by the pilgrims
and this " Canterbury water " is said to have had the power
of working miraculous cures.
175
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
On February 21, 1173, Thomas was canonized by Pope
Alexander III. at the pressing demand of the English people.
Kings, princes and pilgrims of all ranks lavished gifts on
the shrine, and the offerings became an important source of
revenue to Christ Church. The shrine of St. Thomas of
Canterbury was destroyed by order of Henry VIII. in
September, 1538.
176
39— RICHARD, 1173 to 1184.
King of England : Henry II., 1154 to 1189.
After the murder of Becket, the see of Canterbury remained
vacant for two years and five months. It was proposed to
elect Robert, Abbot of Bee, to the vacant see, but he declined
to accept the burden of so high an office. At length, a council
was held at Westminster on June 3, 1173, King Kenry
being still absent in Normandy. The usual disputes arose
between the monks and the bishops of the province concerning
the right to elect a primate. The monks desired to chose one
of their own order, who would uphold the principles of Becket,
but the king's justiciar, who was present, refused to agree to
this being aware that Henry greatly dreaded further disturb-
ances in the Church. He, therefore, supported the bishops in
their choice of Richard, Prior of St. Martin's, Dover, who was
duly elected.1
Richard was a Norman of humble birth, and had received
his early education at the monastery of Christ Church, where
he afterwards became monk. While acting as chaplain to
Archbishop Theobald he became intimate with Thomas a
Becket. After Becket's return to England in 1170 he sent
Richard on a mission to young Prince Henry, but the prior
was coldly received by the prince's advisers. It would have
been difficult to find a churchman whose character presented
a greater contrast to that of his predecessor. Richard
possessed a moderate and equable disposition, and was anxious
to keep on good terms with the king. The monks, who looked
on him with disfavour because he failed to uphold the prin-
ciples of Becket, accused him of nepotism, and of wasting the
property of the Church. On the other hand the king is said
to have admonished him for his carelessness in maintaining
discipline, and for his want of energy. It is evident that
he did not entirely approve of clerical immunities which
1 Chronicle of Reign of Henry II., etc. (Rolls series), p. 256.
177
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
frequently involved injustice even towards the clergy them-
selves. In a letter which he wrote in 1180 to one of his
suffragans, he complained that the murderer of a Jew or
layman was punished with death, while he who killed a priest
was only excommunicated by the Church.
Prince Henry, who had quarrelled with his father, refused
to consent to the consecration of Richard, and sent com-
plaints concerning him to Rome. Richard set out for Rome
in company with Reginald Fitz-Jocelin, Bishop-elect of Bath.
He found the pope at Anagni, but messengers from Prince
Henry and from Louis VII. of France had arrived before him,
in order to forbid his consecration. Richard was supported
by ambassadors from Henry II., and was able to disprove the
accusations that he was of illegimate birth and that his
election had been uncanonical* On April 7, 1174, Pope
Alexander III. consecrated him, and gave him the pallium.
In May, the archbishop set out on his homeward journey.
Embarking at Astura, he landed at Genoa, and proceeded
through Burgundy. At St. Jean de Maurienne he consecrated
his companion Reginald to the see of Bath. At Barfleur he
was met by Henry II., who gave him a cordial reception.
While Richard was reposing in London from the fatigues
of his journey, news reached him that a great part of Canterbury
Cathedral, including the famous choir of Conrad, had been
destroyed by a fire.3 His first care, therefore, on arriving at
Canterbury was to set on foot the rebuilding of his cathedral.
The work was entrusted to a French architect, William de Sens.
On May 11, 1175, the archbishop held a synod at West-
minster, which was attended by the king and his son Prince
Henry. Many canons of ecclesiastical discipline were passed.
The clergy were forbidden to wear their hair long, to carry
arms, or to drink in taverns. It was decreed that the con-
secrated wine should not be placed in tin vessels, and clergy
were forbidden to buy livings.4 After the council Richard
accompanied Henry and his son to visit the shrine of St.
Thomas of Canterbury. When the French King Louis VII.
visited the shrine in company with Henry in 1179, Richard
received the two kings at Canterbury.
2 Ralph de Diceto, Opera, I., 388. 3 Ibid., p. 390.
* Gervase of Canterbury, Opera, I., 251.
178
Richard
The old quarrel concerning the supremacy of the see of
Canterbury was now renewed by Roger, Archbishop of York,
who claimed that the bishops of Lincoln, Chester, Worcester
and Hereford were his suffragans. King Henry, after vainly
attempting to settle the dispute, invited the pope to send a
legate to England to give a decision concerning the rights
of the sees. A council was accordingly held in St. Catherine's
Chapel, Westminster, in March 1176, at which the papal legate,
Cardinal Uguccione, presided. When Roger of York entered
the chapel the legate had already taken his seat with Arch-
bishop Richard at his right hand. Roger, who claimed
precedence over Richard because he had been consecrated
before him, attempted to place himself between the archbishop
and the legate. Failing to succeed, he sat down in Richard's
lap. The other bishops, greatly amazed at this proceeding,
raised a loud clamour. The archbishop of Canterbury's
men dragged Roger from his ill-chosen place, threw him on
the ground, tore his vestments, and trod on him. It is
certain that he would have been seriously injured by their
violence, had Richard not interfered on his behalf.5
Roger, ragged, bleeding and covered with dust as he was,
hastened to the king to make his complaint. Henry on seeing
his condition was at first exceedingly angry, but on learning
the truth of the matter laughed heartily, and declared that
he had been treated as he deserved. Meantime the legate,
terrified by this scene of violence, fled from the council, which
was dissolved without any settlement of the dispute. In the
following August King Henry held another council at
Winchester, when he succeeded in arranging a truce of five
years between the prelates. In the same year (1176), Arch-
bishop Richard accompanied Joanna, the daughter of Henry, as
far as St. Gilles, where she was met by the ships of her future
husband, William II. of Sicily.6
A serious quarrel arose between Richard and Roger, Abbot-
elect of St. Augustine's. Roger asked for benediction from the
archbishop on condition of professing to him only conditional
obedience, "saving the rights of his monastery." Roger was
suspected of having agreed to pay a yearly tribute to the
pope on condition that his monastery was freed from episcopal
5 Ibid., p. 258. 6 Ibid., 260.
179
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
jurisdiction. The archbishop consequently refused his bene-
diction, and Roger appealed to Rome. The pope espoused
his cause and in 1178 summoned Richard to appear before
him at a Lateran council. The archbishop set out, but on
reaching Paris was advised by his friends to turn back. As
this advice accorded with his own inclinations, he returned
to Canterbury.7 Pope Alexander III. bestowed the bene-
diction on Roger, and sent him back with a letter to Richard
commanding that in future the primates of Canterbury
should give their blessing to the abbots of St. Augustine's
without requiring a profession of obedience. King Henry
supported Richard against the abbot, and it was afterwards
proved that the charters by which he had claimed freedom
from episcopal jurisdiction were spurious. The monastery
accordingly lost many of its privileges.
After the death of Prince Henry on June 11, 1183,
Richard was sent to Le Mans, where the prince's body had
been first buried, to convey it for burial to Rouen. The
archbishop returned to England in the following August.
In February, 1186, when on a journey to Rochester, he was
suddenly taken ill at the village of Hailing or AUingham, in
Kent, and died there on the 16th. His enemies the monks
afterwards pretended that his illness was brought on by terror
at a vision, in which the Lord appeared to him saying : " Thou
hast wasted the property of my Church, and I will root thee
out from the earth."8 He was buried in Christ Church in
the oratory of St. Mary.
t Ibid., I., 276. 8 Roger of Hoveden's Annals, ill
180
40.— BALDWIN, 1185 to 1190.
Kings of England : Henry II., 1154 to 1189.
Richard I., 1189 to 1199.
Shortly after the death of Richard, King Henry II.
convened a council at Reading for the purpose of electing
a new archbishop. The monks of Christ Church claimed as
usual the first voice in the election, and refused to submit to
the choice of any candidate likely to be approved by the
bishops. The council was accordingly dissolved without
any election having been made. Nine months elapsed before
the king summoned another council to meet in London.
This time the bishops insisted on taking the matter into their
own hands, and elected Baldwin, Bishop of Worcester, to the
vacant see. Upon this the monks in great indignation
withdrew from the council, and returned to Canterbury.
Thither the king followed them, and after a prolonged dis-
cussion succeeded in persuading them to choose Baldwin,
on the understanding that his election by the bishops was
declared null and void.1 The primate-elect received the
pallium from Rome, and was enthroned at Canterbury on
May 19, 1185.
Baldwin, the son of poor parents, was born at Exeter. He
probably received his early education in the monastic school
of his native city, where he afterwards became a schoolmaster.
His zeal, learning and piety recommended him to the notice
of Bartholomew, Bishop of Exeter, who made him an arch-
deacon. Later he resigned his archdeaconry to enter the
Cistercian monastery of Ford in Devonshire. Within a year
of his arrival there, he was chosen abbot.2 While holding this
position he produced several literary works. Two of his
books, " De Commendatione Fidei, " and " De Sacramento
Altaris," and sixteen short treatises or sermons have been
preserved. Though they do not show great learning, they
1 Roger of Hoveden's Annals, 11 84.
2 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pont., p. 400.
l8l
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
bear evidence to his wide knowledge of the scriptures.
In 1180 Baldwin was consecrated bishop of Worcester.
From the time of his leaving Ford, he appears to have joined
the party of the secular clergy, in opposition to the monks,
who consequently opposed his translation to Canterbury.
Giraldus Cambrensis, Archdeacon of Brecknock, who knew
Baldwin intimately, gives the following description of him :
" He was of complexion somewhat swarthy, his countenance
open and like a plain-meaning man, but very comely ; he was
of medium height, well-made and slender-limbed. In manner
he was modest and sober, and abstemious in his diet ; of few
words, slow to anger and very studious from his childhood. "
His only fault was that he lacked severity and strength of
purpose. For this cause the pope in a certain letter greeted
him thus : " Urbanus servus servorum dei, monacho fer-
ventissimo, abbati calido, episcopo tepido, archiepiscopo
remisso." He appears to have been easily influenced by
changes in his circumstances, and by the opinions of those
who surrounded him.
The lavish expenditure and luxury of the monastery of
Christ Church were displeasing to Baldwin. At this time
seventeen different dishes are said to have been served daily
at the prior's table. Though the archbishop as abbot of
Christ Church was nominal head of the monastery, the prior
had gradually come to adopt an independent position.
As the state tended to become more national the monasteries
became colonies of Roman partisans, who looked for support
to the pope rather than to the king. From the time of Anselm,
the prior and convent of Christ Church had been granted
separate jurisdiction over their own estates. The object
of this had been, not to exempt the monks from the authority
of the archbishop, but to prevent their estates from falling
into the hands of the king during a vacancy. But the policy
was easily interpreted by the monks as freeing them from
subjection to either king or primate.3
Baldwin, weary of the quarrels and pretensions of the monks,
determined to found a college for secular priests at Hackington,
now commonly called St. Stephen's, the most northerly suburb
of Canterbury, about three furlongs from the cathedral. To
3 Stubbs, Introduction to Epist. Cant., p. 377.
182
Baldwin
the college he intended to attach an episcopal residence for
himself, where he would be free from all interference.
An institution of this kind is said to have been projected
by both St. Anselm and St. Thomas of Canterbury, who
intended it to be inhabited by men of learning. Baldwin
obtained permission from the pope to build the college,
and to endow it with one-fourth of the offertories bestowed
on the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury. The scheme
met with determined opposition on the part of the monks
of Christ Church, who suspected not without reason that
Baldwin intended to transfer to his new foundation the right
of electing the archbishops of Canterbury. Having appealep
to Rome, they succeeded in obtaining a papal bull, ordering
the buildings at Hackington to be destroyed.
Baldwin refused to obey the pope's mandate, and proceeded
to install secular priests in the half-finished college. Again
the prior and convent appealed to Rome, and the famous
contest which now began occupied the energies of Baldwin
during the remainder of his life. He was steadily supported
by the king and by Ranulf de Glanville, the justiciary. In
a letter to the pope King Henry declared that he would
rather be driven from the throne than let the monks get the
better of the archbishop. But the weight of all the great
monasteries of Europe except those of the Cistercian order
was thrown into the opposite scale. While the nobles
supported the archbishop, the people sided with the monks.
The monks' defiance of the archbishop's authority provoked
him to cut off all their supplies. For eighty-two weeks the
monastery was in a state of blockade, and no food reached the
inmates save what was brought them by friends or by pilgrims
to Becket's shrine. So ample, however, were these con-
tributions, some of which came even from Jews, that if one
may believe the tale of Gervase of Canterbury, who was then
an inmate of the monastery, the brethren were able out of
their superabundance to give a daily meal to two hundred
poor strangers.4 In spite of the king's prohibition, the prior
with certain of the monks left England, and proceeded to Rome
to complain to the pope of the treatment they had received.
But in Rome they died of the plague which was then raging.
i Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings. II., 437.
183
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Baldwin then appointed a prior of his own choice, named
Roger Norreys, and installed him in Christ Church, notwith-
standing the opposition of the monks.
The dispute was not settled until the reign of Richard I.
Baldwin was then desirous of making peace with the
monks before setting out for Palestine. In November, 1189,
Richard visited Canterbury, and arranged a compromise. It
was agreed that the college of Hackington should be destroyed,
and Roger Norreys deposed from the office of prior. The
monks then made submission to Baldwin, and it was con-
ceded that the archbishop had the right to build a collegiate
church wherever he pleased. He accordingly exchanged
certain estates belonging to his see for twenty-four acres of
land at Lambeth belonging to the see of Rochester. He then
caused all the stones, timber and building materials which
he had collected to be transported by water from Hacking-
ton to Lambeth, where he founded a new college,5 which,
however, he did not live to complete.
Baldwin was the first archbishop of Canterbury to make
a pastoral visitation through Wales. He first visited that
country in the year 1187. In 1188, having himself taken
the crusader's vow, he returned to Wales in company
with the justiciar, Ranulf de Glanville, in order to preach
a crusade there. He was successful in inducing large
numbers of Welshmen, including many Welsh princes, to take
the cross.
A vow to join in a crusade had been one of the conditions
under which Henry II. had obtained absolution from the
pope after the murder of Becket. The old king would un-
doubtedly have set out for Palestine had he not been hindered
by the rebellion of his sons, and by the invasion of his French
dominions by Philip of France. Baldwin was Henry's
constant companion during the last few months of his life, and
attended him when, broken-hearted by the treachery of his
favourite son, John, he lay on his death-bed at Chinon.
He died on July 6, 1189. In the following September
Baldwin crowned Richard I. King of England.
Richard had taken the crusader's vow during his father's
life-time, and on December 14 he left England to proceed
5 J. Cave- Browne, Lambeth Palace, p. 5.
184
Baldwin
by slow stages to Palestine. Archbishop Baldwin remained
in England until the following March to settle the affairs of
his see. He appointed Robert, Bishop of London, to ad-
minister his diocese during his absence. On March 6 he
set out in company with Hubert Walter, the popular bishop
of Salisbury, and with Ranulf de Glanville the justiciar.
Of these three famous men only Hubert survived to return to
England. They proceeded straight to Palestine, leaving the
king at Marseilles, and reached Acre on October 12. Baldwin
had equipped at his own expenses a body of two hundred
knights, and three hundred attendants who fought under his
banner. During the attack on Acre in the following
November, the archbishop guarded the camp in company
with Frederick of Suabia, and Theobald of Blois. Before the
attack began he absolved and blessed the host.
The aged prelate had expected to find a Christian army
united in the defence of the holy places, and was sorely grieved
by the licentiousness which prevailed in the camp. Sorrow
and the hardships to which he was exposed brought on sick-
ness. He was heard to pray that he might be taken away
from the turmoil of the world, " for," said he, " I have
remained long enough with this army."6
He died on November 19, 1190, and was buried at Acre.7
By his will, of which he had appointed Hubert Walter the
executor, he left his private property to be devoted to the
relief of the holy places, requesting that it might be spent
chiefly in providing sentinels for the camp.
* Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, II., 568.
7 Gervase of Canterbury, Opera, I. 488.
185
13
4i.— HUBERT WALTER, 1193-1205.
Kings of England : Richard I., 1189 to 1199.
John, 1199 to 1216.
Hubert Walter, the son of a Norman baron named Hervey
Walter, and of his wife Matilda de Valognes, was born at West
Dereham, in Norfolk, where his family had settled soon after
the Conquest. His mother was the sister of Bertha, wife of
the famous justiciar, Ranulf de Glanville, in whose household
Hubert and his brothers appear to have been brought up.
After his ordination, Hubert became chaplain to his uncle
Ranulf. In 1185 his name appears among those of the barons
and justiciars before whom fines were levied in the Curia Regis.1
In the following year, he was made dean of York. Shortly
after his coronation in September, 1189, King Richard I.
held a council at Pipewell, in Northamptonshire, at which he
chose prelates for all the vacant sees. Hubert was elected
bishop of Salisbury, and the appointment of Geoffrey, the
king's half-brother, to the archbishopric of York was confirmed.
Hubert stood at the head of a party in the York chapter,
who had disputed the validity of Geoffrey's election, and who
had proposed the dean himself as a suitable candidate for
the primacy. His election to Salisbury cleared this obstacle
out of Geoffrey's way.2 Hubert was consecrated by Arch-
bishop Baldwin on October 22, 1189.
Having taken the cross, he set out in the following spring
for Palestine, in company with Archbishop Baldwin and his
uncle, Ranulf de Glanville. Neither the archbishop nor the
justiciar lived to return to England. Hubert tended and
comforted them both in their last hours, and was appointed
by Baldwin the executor of his will. On the arrival
of Richard, he became the king's adviser, and most
trusted diplomatic agent in Palestine. He also rendered
1 Foss, Judges of England, II., 123. ,
2 Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings, II., 277.
186
Hubert Walter
great service to the army during the king's illness,
and was chiefly instrumental in procuring a truce with
Saladin, after the French king had deserted the field.
It was Hubert who, in Richard's place, led the band of
pilgrims admitted by the Turks to visit the holy sepulchre.
Saladin received the bishop with much honour, and they
conversed together for some time. Before they parted Saladin
invited the bishop to request whatsoever he might wish. He
asked that for the future two Latin priests, with two deacons,
maintained by the offerings of the faithful, might perform
divine service at our Lord's tomb, and that an equal number
might be allowed at Bethlehem and at Nazareth. To this
Saladin agreed.3
Hubert afterwards led back the remnants of the host from
Palestine to Europe. On reaching Sicily he learned that King
Richard had been captured in his passage through Germany.
Hubert hastened to visit the imprisoned king, who instructed
him to return to England without delay to raise money for
his ransom.
Meantime the chapter of Christ Church, on receiving the
news of Archbishop Baldwin's death, had elected Reginald
Fitzjocelin, Bishop of Bath to the see of Canterbury.
Immediately after his appointment Reginald went to Bath
to make arrangements for the election of his successor. On
his return journey to Canterbury he was stricken with apoplexy
and died on December 26, 1192.
On hearing of the death of Reginald, Richard wrote from
his captivity to the chapter at Christ Church and to his mother,
Queen Eleanor, advising the election of the bishop of
Salisbury to the archiepiscopal see. Hubert was accordingly
elected by the chapter on May 29, 1193, and by the suffragans
of the province on the following day. After receiving the
pallium from Rome he was enthroned at Canterbury on
Novenber 7, of the same year.
The new archbishop showed indefatigable zeal and energy
in exerting himself to raise the 100,000 pounds required for the
king's ransom.4
In September Hubert was appointed chief justiciar in
s Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, II., 584.
+ Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pont., p. 406.
187
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
place of Walter de Constance, Archbishop of Rouen, who
proceeded to Normandy with Queen Eleanor to negotiate
concerning the release of Richard. The acceptance by the
primate of a secular office under the crown was condemned
by the clergy. But the great service which the archbishop
rendered to the State while acting as justiciar justified him
in accepting the office. He was chiefly instrumental in
discovering and frustrating the conspiracy of the king's brother
John against the English crown. An emissary sent to England
by John to gain adherents to his cause was promptly arrested
and his papers seized by Hubert's orders. The archbishop
then demanded the surrender of all the castles held by John
in England. He was engaged in besieging that of Nottingham
when Richard landed in England.
A few months later (April, 1194) Hubert officiated at the
king's second coronation at Winchester.5 Richard remained
in England only a few months, and showed little gratitude
toward his English subjects who had made such sacrifices
for his release.
After the king's return to Normandy he continued to
count on Hubert to raise money for the French wars. In
the space of two years the archbishop is said to have raised
the sum of 1,100,000 marks. He cannot however be accused
of having adopted unlawful means to raise money. Consider-
able sums were derived from the sale of charters, conceding
certain municipal rights to the towns. He was also zealous
in the administration of justice, and from the fines levied in
the court much profit accrued to the crown. By his advice
weights and measures were regulated and other laws against
fraud passed. In 1195 he issued an order requiring every
man above the age of fifteen to take an oath for the main-
tenance of public peace before knights appointed for the
purpose in every shire. From this custom afterwards origin-
ated our Justices of the Peace. The archbishop's power was
further increased by his appointment as legate to the
apostolic see.6 This secured for him the supremacy over
Geoffrey, Archbishop of York, to whose policy he was
opposed. He had many enemies, however.
s Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1192.
6 Ralph de Diceto, Hist., II. , 125.
188
Hubert Walter
In 1196 the London craftsmen, discontented with the
system of taxation enforced by Hubert, rose in revolt under
the leadership of William FitzOsbert, a factious demagogue.
Hubert took prompt means to gain the citizens to his
side and succeeded in persuading them to surrender to
him hostages for the preservation of public peace.
FitzOsbert finding himself deserted took refuge with his
family in the church of St. Mary at Bow. Hubert ordered
the church to be set on fire and FitzOsbert, attempting to
escape, was captured and executed. His death created a
reaction in his favour and the people reverenced him as a
martyr. Much indignation was excited against the archbishop
by his refusal to recognize the rights of sanctuary. His
enemies appealed to Rome against him and Pope Innocent III.
revived an ancient edict, forbidding clerics to hold secular
offices. The pope also wrote to King Richard specially re-
questing him to remove the archbishop of Canterbury from
the justiciarship. Richard reluctantly obeyed, transferring
the office from Hubert to Geoffrey Fitz-Peter.7 The arch-
bishop afterwards joined Richard in Normandy where he
remained until after the king's death.
Hubert supported the claim of John to the English throne
in opposition to that of the rightful heir, Arthur of Brittany.
He considered the safety of the kingdom in its unsettled
state would be risked in the hands of a youthful sovereign,
and up to that time he had probably had no opportunity
of estimating John's real character.
Hubert crowned King John and his second wife
Isabella, at Westminster, on May 27, 1199. On that occa-
sion he made the famous speech in which the old English
theory of elections to the throne of England was pro-
claimed for the last time. One of John's first acts after
his coronation was to appoint Archbishop Hubert his
chancellor. This office Hubert accepted contrary to the advice
of his friends and to the prohibition of the pope, and held it
with distinction until his death. In virtue of his authority
as chancellor he was able to restrain many of the excesses of
the profligate king. John, though unable to dispense with his
services, repaid them with hatred. On receiving news of
* Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1198.
189
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Hubert's death John is said to have exclaimed, " Now at last
I am king of England!"
After the loss of Normandy Hubert joined certain of
the royal counsellors who attempted to dissuade the
king from attempting another hopeless expedition against
the king of France. For this reason John accused the arch-
bishop of secretly favouring the French king. Hubert was
afterwards sent with other prelates to France to negotiate
a treaty of peace, but the mission failed.
During the greater part of his pontificate Hubert was en-
gaged in a dispute with Giraldus Cambrensis, Bishop-elect of
St. David's. Hubert refused to sanction the election of
Giraldus as he was determined that no Welshman should
hold the bishopric. Giraldus journeyed to Rome to appeal
to the pope, and also to request for his see metropolitan
authority in Wales. This, however, he failed to obtain,
and was afterwards accused of stirring up the Welsh to rebellion.
His election to the see of St. David's was finally annulled,
and he made profession of obedience to Archbishop Hubert.8
In spite of the opposition of his chapter Hubert began to
rebuild the college at Lambeth which had been begun by
his predecessor. Additional ground was obtained from
the dean and chapter of Rochester and the chapel rose
once more on its original site. To propitiate the monks
of Christ Church, Hubert took an oath that their rights
should not be infringed by the new foundation, and de-
creed that the prior of the monastery should always
be a prebendary of the church at Lambeth. But even
this failed to satisfy them. They secretly despatched two
of their number to Rome, and obtained from the pope
a bull ordering the college at Lambeth to be demolished.
Hubert pleaded in vain that his predecessor as lord of the
manor of Lambeth had been granted full authority to build a
collegiate church there. The pope refused to confirm the
grant, and the canons having been dispossessed, the college
was pulled down.9 From the time of Archbishop Hubert,
however, Lambeth Palace has been the official residence of
the archbishops of Canterbury.
8 Gervase of Canterbury, Actus Pont., p. 412.
» J. Cave Browne, Lambeth Palace, p. 5.
190
Hubert Walter
In the midst of his multitudinous duties Hubert did
not neglect the care of the Church. He founded a monas-
tery at Dereham, his native place, and another at Wolver-
hampton. He presented the living of Halstow to the
church at Canterbury, devoting its revenues to the support
of the cathedral library. He also obtained from King
John permission to revive the ancient privileges of the
archbishops to coin money at Canterbury. At his death he
bequeathed many valuable treasures to the cathedral church.10
After the settlement of the dispute concerning Lambeth
College Hubert and the monks appear to have been the best
of friends. That the archbishop was a man of wide sym-
pathies is proved by the influence he exercised over persons
of all ranks. On the feast of SS. Peter and Paul, June 29,
1205, he went to Canterbury and celebrated mass in the
cathedral with unusual pomp. A few days later, before
setting out for Rochester, he appears to have had a premonition
that his death was near. He summoned the chapter and asked
the forgiveness of the monks for any wrong he had done them.
He then solemnly admonished them to promote with zeal the
welfare and usefulness of their church, and said he would
shortly return to them on a visit " which would be longer
than heretofore."11
His words were prophetic. On the following day he set
out for Rochester, but on the way was attacked by a fever,
and died after three days' illness at the village of Tenham
on July 13, 1205. His body was conveyed to Canterbury and
buried in the cathedral. A contemporary writer declares that
Hubert was deficient in scholarship, and was too prone to
listen to slander. But whatever his faults it is certain that he
was a true patriot, a man of honest purpose, and of pure life.12
The family of the Butlers (Marquesses of Ormonde) trace
descent from Theobald Walter, the brother of Archbishop
Hubert, who accompanied Henry II. to Ireland. Theobald
was created Chief Butler of Ireland, and the marquesses of
Ormonde still claim this hereditary title.
10 Actus Pont., p. 412. " Ibid.
" Cf. Stubbs' Introd. to Epist. Cant., XC
I9I
42.— STEPHEN LANGTON, 1207 to 1228.
Kings of England : John, 1199 to 1216.
Henry III., 1216 to 1272.
Almost immediately after the death of Archbishop Hubert
Walter, a party of the younger monks of Christ Church pro-
ceeded to elect a primate of their own choice. Meeting
secretly at midnight, they chose the sub-prior Reginald, and,
thinking to outwit their elder brethren, hurried him off to
Rome to have his election confirmed by the pope. On his way
through France, Reginald, who was a vulgar, conceited little
man, could not resist the assumption of archiepiscopal state,
and in spite of a promise made to the monks to keep his election
secret until it had been confirmed by the pope, he travelled
with great pomp to Rome.
The news of the election thus reached King John, who in-
dignantly refused to sanction it, and who lost no time in
nominating to the archiepiscopal see a favourite of his own,
John de Grey, Bishop of Norwich. A deputation of monks
was then despatched by the king to Rome to inform the pope
that Reginald's election had been uncanonical, and to apply
for the pallium for John de Grey.1 The pontifical throne was
then occupied by Innocent III., the greatest of mediaeval
popes. After investigating the matter, he wisely re-
refused to consecrate either of the nominees, and ordered the
monks to proceed to a new election. Though the deputies
despatched by John had promised to elect none but the bishop
of Norwich, they were easily persuaded by the pope to choose
Stephen Langton, an Englishman, who was then in Rome.2
As later events proved, no wiser choice could have been made.
Stephen was the son of an Englishman named Henry de
Langton, and is believed to have been born at the village of
Langton, near Spilsby, in Lincolnshire, though the evidence for
this is uncertain. At an early age he was sent to study at
1 Canterbury Chronicle (Rolls series), p. LIV.
1 Ibid., p. LXI.
192
Stephen Langton
the university of Paris. There he attained a reputation for
learning which secured for him prebends in the cathedrals of
Paris and York. It was probably during his residence as
a professor at Paris that his most important literary works
were produced. They consist chiefly of commentaries on the
scriptures. A life of Richard I. was attributed to him, but
has not been preserved. He was also the author of several
Latin poems, including one on the seven days of the creation.
A curious theological comment or moralization written by
Langton on the stanzas of a popular French song " La Belle
Aliz," is printed by Wright in his " Biographia Literaria "
(Vol. II., p. 444). The division of the Bible into chapters is
said to have been the work of Langton.
At the university of Paris, Stephen Langton made the
acquaintance of young Lothair Conti, the son of an Italian count.
When in 1198 Lothair, at the early age of thirty-seven, was
called to occupy the supreme position in Christendom, assum-
ing the title of Innocent III., he did not forget his brilliant
English friend. Stephen was invited to Rome, where he
lectured on canon law with conspicuous success, his lectures
being attended by some of the greatest scholars in Europe,
including the pope himself. In 1206 he was created cardinal
priest of St. Chrysogonus. At the time of his elevation to
the see of Canterbury Stephen Langton was probably the most
distinguished churchman in Europe, next to the pope.
On hearing of Stephen's election the wrath of King John
knew no bounds. He swore a terrible oath that the primate-
elect should never set foot within the English dominions.
He also addressed insolent letters to the pope informing him
that the tribute from England for which the Apostolic see had
long been indebted to John's predecessors would henceforth
cease to be paid. But the pope, ignoring this threat, conse-
crated Stephen Langton at Viterbo on June 17, 1207, and
afterwards bestowed on him the pallium.3
As the monks of Christ Church had acknowledged Stephen,
the king caused them to be banished from England, all except
fourteen, who were infirm. They were replaced by monks
from St. Augustine's, Rochester and Faversham. Henry
Langton, the archbishop's father, escaped to St. Andrews, in
3 Ibid.
193
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Scotland, where he soon afterwards died.4 In 1208, as the
king still refused to receive Stephen, the pope placed England
under an interdict. Though John forced certain of the clergy
to disregard the interdict many churches throughout the
country were closed, and religious services ceased. This
deprivation was felt bitterly by the English people, but the
king remained indifferent to the suffering he caused. During
this time Archbishop Stephen resided at the French monastery
of Pontigny, which had formerly been the refuge of Becket.
In 1209 the king invited Stephen to visit him in England,
and sent a safe conduct for three weeks addressed not to the
archbishop of Canterbury, but to Cardinal Stephen Langton.
To accept this designation would have been to acknowledge
his election invalid, and Stephen consequently refused to
proceed to England. A few months later, John yielded
so far as to send another invitation addressed to the
archbishop of Canterbury. Stephen then crossed to
England, but the king refused to meet him in person,
and the royal envoys failed to make satisfactory terms.5
So Stephen returned to France. For six years the struggle
continued. Proposal after proposal was made by the
pope in the endeavour to make peace between John and
the archbishop ; letter followed letter ; embassy followed
embassy ; but without definite result. At length in 1213 the
pope issued a bull of excommunication against King John,
and authorized Philip of France to proceed to England with
an army to dethrone the disobedient monarch.
John still hoped to defend his kingdom by force of arms,
but on learning that the barons of England were preparing
to join Philip against him he suddenly gave way, weakly
surrendering all and more than he had formerly refused.
On May 13, 1213, he yielded up the crown of England
to Pandulf, the papal legate, in the church of the Templars
at Ewell, and swore that he held his kingdom only as the pope's
vassal. He also promised tribute and complete submission to
the pope in all things.
A few weeks later Stephen landed in England. The king
met him at Porchester, in Hampshire, fell at his feet weeping,
and implored his absolution. They proceeded together to
4 Ibid, p. LXIII. t ibid., pp. CVIII-CX.
194
Stephen Langton
Winchester, and before entering the cathedral the archbishop
solemnly released the king from excommunication. Stephen
afterwards celebrated mass in Winchester Cathedral, and in
the presence of a rejoicing multitude who had come thither
to welcome him, gave the king the kiss of peace.6
The concord which now seemed to be restored was destined
to be of short duration. The conflict between the king and
the pope was succeeded by a still greater conflict between the
king and the barons. Stephen had been only a few weeks in
England when he sided with the barons against the king. At
a meeting held at St. Paul's, London, in August, 1213, the
archbishop advised the nobles to base their claims for redress
on a charter of King Henry I., which he caused to be read.
The barons then took a solemn oath to conquer or die in
the defence of their liberties.7
John had demanded that the barons should accompany
him on an expedition to Poitou, and on their refusal to do so
he marched northward with an army to punish his dis-
obedient vassals. Stephen followed him to Nottingham, and,
as he refused to desist, threatened to excommunicate all who
took part in the expedition. This compelled John to abandon
his intention, and his army was disbanded.8
Though after the archbishop's arrival services had been
resumed in the churches, the pope had not yet given his
sanction for this. He therefore sent to England a legate,
Nicholas, Bishop of Tusculum, with authority to withdraw the
interdict. When this had been done, Nicholas, without
consulting Stephen, proceeded to fill the vacant bishoprics
and abbacies with King John's nominees, many of whom
were unfitted for the sacred offices. Stephen appealed to the
pope against these elections, with the result that Nicholas was
recalled to Rome. The dispute had served, however, to arouse
the pope's suspicions against Stephen.
It is uncertain what part Stephen took in drawing up the
famous Magna Charta. The insertion of the first clause,
guaranteeing the liberty of the Church, was almost certainly
his work. He was present at the great historic meeting in
the meadow of Runnymede on June 15, 1215, when as a
6 Roger of Wendover, Flowers of History, Bohn's edition, p. 274.
* p. 276. 8 Ibid., p. 275.
195
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
commissioner he negotiated with the barons on the king's
behalf.
John's consent to the Charter appears to have been
given only for the purpose of gaining time. Without delay
he raised a mercenary army, and sent messages to the pope
claiming his aid against the barons. To safeguard his person
and also to ensure for himself papal support, John had
previously taken the crusader's vow. In response to the
king's appeal, Innocent issued a bull on August 24, 1215,
declaring the Magna Charta null and void, on the assumption
that it had been obtained by violence, and bidding the arch-
bishop excommunicate the disturbers of the kingdom. In view
of Innocent's well-known integrity it must be supposed that in
acting thus he was ignorant of the king's real character.
Langton received the pope's letters as he was preparing to
start for Rome to attend the Fourth Lateran Council. He
consented to a general issue of the sentence of excommunica-
tion, but refused to enforce it until he had had an interview
with the pope, whom he believed to have been misinformed
as to the real state of affairs.9
For his disobedience Stephen was suspended by the pope's
orders from his archiepiscopal functions. On reaching Rome,
he was coldly received by Innocent III., who confirmed the
sentence of suspension against him, and ordered him to remain
in Italy until peace had been restored.
Stephen did not return to England until 1218. By that
time both Innocent and John were dead, and peace had been
temporarily restored by the accession of the boy-king,
Henry III. During the last ten years of his life the archbishop
remained in the peaceful occupation of his see, though he did
not cease to take part in public affairs. In 1220 he obtained
from Pope Honorius III. a promise that in his life-time no
papal legate should be sent to England. This did not prevent
the pope from despatching Otho, sub-deacon of the Roman
Church, to collect money from the English clergy. But on a
protest being made by the archbishop, Otho was recalled and
the pope decreed that henceforth the office of legatus natus
should be held by the archbishops of Canterbury.
In 1222, Stephen held an important synod at Osney, in
9 Ibid., p. 342.
196
Stephen Langton
Oxfordshire, when fifty ecclesiastical constitutions were drawn
up. These constitutions are still recognized as forming part
of the canon law of the English Church.10 At the same synod
a deacon who pretended to be Jesus Christ was condemned to
death, and afterwards burnt at the stake. Stephen supported
the justiciar Hubert de Burgh against the rebellious barons,
who threatened to usurp the royal authority. His last
public act was to obtain from Henry III. in 1225, a confirma-
tion of the Magna Charta.
Stephen died at his manor at Slindon, in Sussex, on July
9, 1228, and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral. A stone
fixed in the wall of St. Michael's chapel is said to mark his
tomb, but the tradition is of doubtful authenticity. His
brother, Simon Langton, Archdeacon of Canterbury, who, in
1215, had been elected archbishop of York, but was rejected
by King John, survived him twenty years. His extant
works are very numerous, and consist chiefly of sermons and
commentaries on the books of the Old Testament.
10 WiUrins' Concilia, Vol I., pp. 585-595.
197
43— RICHARD WETHERSHED (or GRANT),
1229 to 1231.
King of England : Henry III., 1216 to 1272.
On August 3, 1228, the chapter of Canterbury, having
received the king's permission to elect a new archbishop,
chose Walter of Eynsham, a monk of their church, and sent
him to Rome to have his election confirmed by the pope.
The king, on hearing of the choice made by the monks,
declared that Walter was unfit for the office, and despatched
messengers after him to Rome to bring against him the
following accusations : (1) That he was a man useless to
the Church and to the kingdom. (2) That his father had
been hung for theft. (3) That he had seduced a nun, and
had by her several children.
Pope Gregory IX., being unable to prove these charges
against Walter, ordered him to submit to an examination
in theology conducted by the cardinals. The unfortunate
primate-elect appears to have been reduced to a condition
of uncontrollable nervousness, and replied in the most
irrelevant manner to the extraordinary questions put to him.
When asked, " How Rachel had wept for her children ? "
he replied " When she was first dead." At the close of the
examination the cardinals declared that he had failed to
satisfy the examiners, and the pope consequently pronounced
him to be unfitted for the office of archbishop.1 Gregory IX.
then wrote to the suffragans of Canterbury stating that
with the approval of the deputation from the chapter then
in Rome, and on the recommendation of Henry III., he
annulled the election of Walter, and chose in his stead
Richard of Wethershed, Chancellor of Lincoln.
Richard is believed to have been born in the village of
Wetheringsett,in Sussex, but of his early life nothing is known.
1 Roger of Wendover, Flowers of History, Bohn's edition, 1228,
1229.
198
Richard Wethershed
The surname of Grant or Le Grand was given him from his
stature, which Matthew Paris says was wonderfully great.
The bishops of Rochester and Bath both claimed the right
to consecrate the new archbishop, and it was finally agreed
that the bishop of Rochester should consecrate him in the
choir of Christ Church and the bishop of Bath, assisted by
two suffragans, in the chapel of the infirmary. The ceremony
took place on June 10, 1229, and on November 23, Richard
received the pallium from Rome.2
In the following January King Henry III., who was con-
stantly in debt, partly owing to the extravagance of his
foreign friends, and partly on account of papal exactions,
called a council at Westminster, and demanded a scutage of
three marks from all laymen and ecclesiastics who held
baronies. The demand was boldly opposed by Archbishop
Richard and certain suffragan bishops, but the majority
were in favour of granting it.3
Richard appears to have been jealous of the power wielded
by the wise and able justiciary, Hubert de Burgh. On the
death of Gilbert, Earl of Clare, the castle and town of Tonbridge
were entrusted to Hubert de Burgh during the minority of the
heir. Richard declared that the late earl had done homage
for Tonbridge to the archbishops of Canterbury, and that the
custody of the town and castle belonged by right to his see.
The king replied that by the law of England the ward-
ship of all castles held by tenants-in-chief belonged to the
crown, but Richard, after excommunicating all the intruders
on his property, set out for Rome to plead the rights of his
Church.
Richard complained to the pope that King Henry gave
undue weight to the counsels of Hubert de Burgh, thus
slighting all the other nobles. He also accused Hubert of
having married a relative of his former wife, and of unjustly
detaining certain possessions of the Church at Canterbury.
He further declared that many of the English bishops and
clergy had accepted secular offices under the crown, to the
neglect of their ecclesiastical duties. The pope promised that
these wrongs should be righted without delay.4
On August 1, 1131, Richard set out on his homeward way,
2 Ibid. 3 Ibid., 1231. 4 Ibid.
199
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
but two days later he died at the Franciscan monastery of
St. Gemini in Umbria, between Todi and Narni. In the
following year Hubert de Burgh was accused, without the
slightest evidence, of having caused his death by poison.
Richard was buried at St. Gemini in his episcopal robes and
jewels. Matthew Paris relates that certain men of the coun-
try, who had beheld his ornaments with greedy eyes, opened
his coffin to steal his ring and other valuables, but were un-
able to pull it from his finger, so firmly did the dead hands
hold it. So the robbers departed beating their breasts in
alarm.
The following works were attributed to Archbishop Richard :
"De Fide et Legibus"; "De Sacramentis " ; "De Universo
Corporali et Spirituali."
200
44— EDMUND RICH OF ABINGDON,
1234 to 1240. S.
King of England : Henry III., 1216 to 1272.
Edmund Rich, the successor of Richard Grant in the see of
Canterbury, was born at Abingdon in Berkshire, probably
about the year 1175. He was the son of pious parents,
Reinald and Mabel Rich, who, through their own exertions,
had attained a modest fortune. Some years after the birth
of Edmund, Reinald retired to the monastery of Emsham
near Oxford, leaving his family of four sons and two daughters
to the care of his wife. Mabel's piety took the form of severe
asceticism, and she is said to have bribed her little son Edmund
to fast on bread and water by the promise of toys. On all
holidays, including Sundays, he sang to her the whole psalter
before partaking of any food. At his own request she made
for him a hair shirt similar to the one which she constantly
wore.1
At an early age the boy was sent to study at Oxford, whence
he proceeded to the university of Paris, accompanied by
his brother Richard. Though in comfortable circumstances,
Mabel gave her sons so little money that they were forced
to beg for food on the way. A legend, preserved by his
biographer, tells that one day when he was walking alone
in the fields near Oxford the Christ-child appeared to him.
In memory of what passed between him and Christ on that
occasion, Edmund used every night to sign his forehead with
the words "Jesus of Nazareth." For several years Edmund
seems to have divided his time between the universities of
Oxford and Paris, spending some months of every year at
each. From Paris he was summoned to the deathbed of
his mother, who blessed him, and committed to his charge
his sisters, Margaret and Alice.2
1 Vita Beati Edmundi, by Bertrand de Pontigny, cap. 3.
2 Ibid., cap. 7.
201
14
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Edmund afterwards placed his sisters in the Benedictine
nunnery of Catesby, in Northamptonshire, this being the
only religious house which would receive them on the prin-
ciple he approved, namely without dowries. Desiring to
take a vow of chastity, he caused two betrothal rings
to be made. One of these he solemnly placed on the finger
of a statue of the Virgin in a church at Oxford. The other
he wore himself until his death.
After completing his studies, Edmund became a teacher
at Oxford and at Paris, where he lectured with great success.
Many stories are told of his charity at this time. He refused
to accept fees from poor students, and is said to have sold
his small library that he might give the proceeds to those
in need. During the illness of one of his scholars Edmund
sat up with him nightly for five weeks, yet this did not prevent
him from giving his usual lectures daily.
After he had given six years to secular teaching, his mother
is said to have appeared to him in a vision, and commanded
him to devote his whole time to divine things. He then
turned to the study of theology, and became famous as a
preacher of extraordinary eloquence.3 About the year 1220,
he was appointed treasurer of Salisbury Cathedral, to which
office was attached a prebend in the cathedral of Calne.
From these appointments he derived a sufficient income, but
was so careless of his worldly goods, that he sometimes found
himself reduced for six months in the year to seek refuge
against poverty in a monastery. He found a home in the
abbey of Stanley, near Chippenham, where the abbot,
Stephen of Lexington, was his friend. While holding the
office of treasurer he volunteered to preach the sixth crusade
in Berks, Oxford, Gloucester and Worcester. So successful
was his mission that he is said to have induced 60,000 persons
to take the cross.
Edmund was residing at his benefice of Calne when news
reached him of his election to the see of Canterbury. Pope
Gregory IX., after rejecting no less than three prelates
nominated in succession by the king and chapter, had at
length recommended the election of Edmund Rich. He
accepted the honour with the greatest reluctance, and was
J Ibid., cap. 16.
202
Edmund Rich of Abingdon
consecrated at Canterbury on April 2, 1234, by Roger,
Bishop of London, assisted by eight suffragans and two
prelates from Ireland. From the time of his elevation to the
primacy he increased his austerities. He practised the
severest abstinence, breaking his fast only once a day, and
rarely permitting himself the luxury of a bed at night. How-
ever worn and tired he might be from his incessant toils, he
would rest on a hard bench or on the ground. In later life
he seldom even lay down, but would snatch a brief sleep as
he sat in his chair. From the frequency of his prayers, his
knees are said to have become like those of St. James, callous
as the knees of a camel.4
Even before his consecration Edmund had shown his
sympathy with the national party, who were opposed to the
king's foreign favourites. On April 9, he appeared before
the king in company with certain barons and bishops, and
threatened him with excommunication if he refused to dis-
miss the foreigners from his court. Henry was forced to yield,
and Peter de Roches, Peter de Rievaulx and the Poitevins
were banished.
In 1234, Richard Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, was murdered
in Ireland, and letters were produced with the royal seal to
prove that Henry had consented to his death. Henry pro-
tested his innocence, and it is probable that the letters had
been forged by his foreign friends. The archbishop, after
sternly admonishing the king, joined the barons in consenting
that the royal treasury should be replenished by a tax on all
movables, as this seemed the only means of keeping the king
out of the clutches of foreigners.5
In January, 1237, Edmund officiated at the marriage of
King Henry with Eleanor of Provence, at Canterbury, and
afterwards crowned the queen in London. In the same year
a papal legate, the Cardinal-deacon Otho, was invited to
England by King Henry, who hoped to use the papal
authority to undermine the archbishop's power. The legate
was received by the monks with great enthusiasm, and took
precedence of the archbishop at all public functions. A
council was held at St. Paul's, London, at which Otho
4 Ibid., cap. 26.
* Hook's Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, III., 128.
203
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
read a letter from the pope, decreeing the abrogation of plur-
alities except when held by a papal dispensation. As the
clergy rightly suspected that this was only an excuse for
extorting more money from them, the decree met with a storm
of opposition.6 The legate, fearing violence to his person,
suggested that the matter should be referred to the pope for
further consideration.
Edmund's disagreement with the king was brought to a
climax by his opposition to the marriage of Eleanor, the
king's sister, with Simon de Montefort. After the murder
of her first husband, Richard, Earl of Pembroke, Eleanor
had taken a vow of chastity before the archbishop, and
from this he refused to release her. Controversies also arose
between the primate and the monks of Christ Church,
whom he accused of gross immorality, and with the monks
of Rochester as to the place where he should consecrate Robert
Grosseteste, the famous bishop-elect of Lincoln. Edmund
determined to visit Rome to confer with the pope concerning
the many difficulties which beset him. He was coldly
received, however, and in every case judgment is said to
have been given by the pope against him. Shortly after
his return to Canterbury, he excommunicated the rebellious
monks, and placed Christ Church under an interdict. The
monks refused to observe the interdict, and appealed to
Rome against him.
Many bishoprics and abbacies were kept vacant at this
time in order that the king might enjoy their revenues. On
the advice of Richard de la Wych, Chancellor of Canterbury,
Edmund wrote to the pope requesting that the archbishops
might be authorized to fill all cathedral and abbey churches,
which were kept vacant for more than six months.7 But he
appealed in vain.
Weary of the perpetual demands for money made by the
papal agents, he at length consented to give one-fifth of his
income (800 marks), to the pope. His example was followed
by the other bishops. But even this did not put an end to
the extortions.8 In 1240 a papal letter arrived in England,
addressed to the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishops of
6 Matthew of Paris, Eng. Hist., Bohn's edition, L, 54.
» Ibid., p. 264. 8 Ibid., p. 278.
204
Edmund Rich of Abingdon
Lincoln and Salisbury, in which they were required to provide
for three hundred Roman clergy out of the first vacant
benefices.
The archbishop, seeing the English Church thus deprived of
its liberties, became deeply depressed by his inability to
mend matters, and determined to retire from his see. With
a small retinue he sailed for France, and took up his
abode at the monastery of Pontigny, where he lived as a
simple monk. The summer heat brought on an attack of
dysentery, which forced him to remove toSoissy. The monks,
by whom he was greatly beloved, wept at his departure, but
he promised that he would return to them by the feast of
St. Edmund the King. At daybreak on November 16, 1240,
he died at Soissy, and four days later, on the feast of
St. Edmund, his remains were taken to Pontigny9 for burial.
So numerous were the miracles said to be wrought at his
tomb that a demand soon arose for his canonization. This
was at first opposed by the pope, by King Henry, and by
Boniface, the successor of Edmund in the see of Canterbury.
Several commissions were appointed to investigate the
authenticity of the miracles at Pontigny, and in 1246 Pope
Innocent IV. was compelled to permit the decree for Edmund's
canonization to be issued at Lyons.10
His works include a treatise entitled " Speculum Ecclesiae,"
and a number of sermons in Latin and French. The guileless
and ascetic character of Edmund Rich made a profound im-
pression on his contemporaries. But he lacked the practica-
bility and strength of purpose necessary to cope with the
difficulties that beset him, and before which his gentle spirit
finally quailed.
9 Vita Beati Edmundi, cap. 60.
10 Matthew of Paris, Eng. Hist., II , 196.
205
45 — BONIFACE OF SAVOY, 1243 to 1270.
King of England : Henry III., 1216 to 1272.
The marriage of Henry III. with Eleanor of Provence had
brought to England fresh swarms of foreigners, for whom the
King was expected to provide. Thomas of Savoy, the
grandfather of Eleanor, had a family of fifteen children, and
the queen's numerous uncles clamoured for the most impor-
tant offices in the English Church and State. Boniface,
the eleventh child of Thomas, had been destined at an early
age for an ecclesiastical career. As a boy he is said to have
entered a Carthusian monastery, and about the year 1234
was elected by Pope Gregory IX. to the see of Belley, in the
south of Burgundy. When in 1240 the archbishopric of
Canterbury became vacant, the king's relatives agreed that
the see would be an excellent provision for Boniface. To
convince the monks of Canterbury of Boniface's fitness for
the post, the king composed an elaborate treatise in which
he lavished praise on the prelate whom he had never yet
seen, setting forth his learning, piety and charity. The monks
were thus induced to nominate him to the vacant see, though
they had afterwards cause to regret their choice.1
Owing to the death of two popes in succession within a
few months, it was not until 1243 that Boniface's election
was confirmed by Innocent IV. The archbishop-elect, who
belonged to a family distinguished for its beauty, was of tall
stature and handsome figure. No greater contrast could
have been possible than that which existed between the
character of this warlike and worldly prelate and that of
the meek and gentle Edmund, his predecessor.
On his arrival in England Boniface was welcomed by the
worthy Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, who urged him
to use his influence with the king for the preservation of
peace in the Church. Boniface was anxious to conciliate the
1 Matthew Paris, Eng. Hist., Bohn's Edition, I., 335.
206
Boniface of Savoy
bishops, whom he expected to unite with him in paying off
the debt on the see of Canterbury, and promised Grosseteste
his support. He accordingly persuaded King Henry to reject
another of his uncles whom he had nominated to the see of
Winchester, and to agree to the election of William de Raleigh,
who had been nominated by the monks.2
Before setting out to attend the General Council of Lyons
Boniface ordered all the woods belonging to his archbishopric
to be cut down and sold. He also raised a considerable
sum from the suffragans on the pretence of paying off the debt
on his see. It soon became evident that he looked on the
great office to which he had been chosen, simply as a means of
raising money to be spent abroad.
On January 15, 1245, he was consecrated at Lyons by Pope
Innocent IV. After the ceremony the pope granted him,
for the term of seven years, the first year's revenues of all
vacant churches subject to the jurisdiction of the see of Canter-
bury. While the council sat, Philip, the brother of Boniface,
who commanded the papal forces, appointed him captain
of the pope's body-guard.3
During the next four years Boniface's military duties detained
him abroad, and he did not return to England until 1249 »
in which year he was enthroned at Canterbury. Learning that
Bishop Grosseteste of Lincoln had made a visitation of the
religious houses for the purpose of restoring discipline, Boniface
determined to follow his example, though with a different
purpose, namely, to increase his opportunities of exacting
money by the imposition of fines. Beginning with his own
monastery of Christ Church, on which he imposed heavy
fines, to the great indignation of the monks, he proceeded
to Faversham, Rochester, and thence to London.
In London he refused to furnish his palace of Lambeth,
and took up his residence in a house belonging to the bishop
of Chichester, standing on the site of what is now Lincoln's
Inn. From this it was inferred that he did not intend to
remain in England. When the archbishop visited St.
Paul's, he was informed by the dean and chapter that the
bishop of the diocese and not the metropolitan was their visitor.
Boniface ordered the doors of the cathedral to be forced
2 Ibid., p. 489. 3 Ibid., II., 60.
207
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
open, but was unable to obtain entrance to the chapter-house.
He then excommunicated the dean, and all who had supported
him.
On the next day, before setting out to visit the priory of
St. Bartholomew, he considered it expedient to don armour
beneath his archiepiscopal vestments. As he passed
through the streets with his retinue, he was greeted by the
jeers of the people. This goaded him to fury. At St. Bartholo-
mew's he was received with the honour due to a metropolitan,
and found the canons in their places in the church ; but the
prior did not appear. Boniface angrily enquired why he
had not been received in the chapter-house. The venerable
sub-prior advanced to reply to him, but was immediately
felled to the ground by the infuriated archbishop, who beat
him unmercifully with his fists, and with horrible unmention-
able oaths swore to kill him. A disgraceful scene ensued,
the canons and attendants of Boniface exchanging blows
freely, and in the scuffle the archbishop's vestments were torn,
thus exposing his armour to the scorn of the onlookers.4
After the archbishop's departure all the canons who had
not been disabled sought the king, bruised and bleeding as
they were, to complain concerning the conduct of his relative,
but Henry refused to receive them. Boniface retired to
his manor at Harrow, and announced his intention of visiting
St. Alban's monastery. But after an interview with the king,
who was greatly distressed by what had occurred, he agreed
to abandon this project. It was soon known to Boniface
that there had been a gathering of his suffragans at Dunstable,
and 4000 marks had been subscribed to enable them to
resist the aggression of the primate. He acknowledged that
he had been hasty, and having withdrawn many of his demands,
suggested that the bishops should send proctors to the pope,
who would examine the claims of both parties. He then
returned to Savoy, whence he wrote letters to the suffragans
and to the chapter promising to pay due regard henceforth
to the privileges of the monasteries, and to release the dean
and chapter of St. Paul's from excommunication.
On his return to England in 1252, Boniface was informed
that one of his officials had been imprisoned and ill-treated
4 Ibid., II., 346.
208
Boniface of Savoy
by Aylmer, Bishop-elect of Winchester, the half-brother
of Henry III. The archbishop decided to bring the case for
trial before the university of Oxford. This won for him
popularity with the party opposed to the king, and the
university court pronounced judgment in his favour.
At a council held at Westminster in May, 1253, King Henry
III., pressed by the barons, took a most solemn oath to keep
the Magna Charta.5 Boniface, who for his own interest had
now sided with the national party, joined the other bishops
in urging the king to regard the claims of his own country-
men in filling important offices in Church and State. Henry
replied with some irony that it was indeed his duty to favour
worthy men of his own nation, and that if Boniface and others
of his kindred cared to begin the reformations they suggested
by resigning their sees he would soon fill the vacancies with
men to whom they could take no exception.6 The archbishop,
finding that he had lost the king's favour, soon returned to
Savoy. In 1255, he proceeded to Italy, and having raised
an army, released his brother Thomas, who for his tyranny
had been imprisoned by the people of Turin.
At the " Mad Parliament " of 1258, Boniface co-operated
with the rebellious barons. He is said to have been one of
the council of twenty-four to whom the government of the
kingdom was afterwards entrusted, and who were chosen partly
by the king, and partly by the barons. The new form of
government did not last long, owing to the quarrels of the
barons among themselves. When war broke out Boniface
took refuge on the continent, and having joined the party
of Prince Edward, exerted himself to raise troops in the king's
defence. In 1263, he received at Boulogne a papal legate,
who had come to excommunicate the rebellious barons.
As the barons refused to permit the legate to land in England,
Boniface summoned a certain number of his suffragans
to Boulogne and entrusted to them the letters of excommuni-
tion. But at Dover the letters were seized, probably with the
consent of the bishops themselves, and thrown into the sea.
After the restoration of peace, Boniface volunteered to
join Prince Edward in the Crusade, but accompanied the
5 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1253.
6 Godwin, Cat. of the Bishops of Eng., p. 118.
209
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
prince only as fax as Savoy. There he died on July 18
1270, at his castle of St. Helena, and was interred
at Hautecombe, the burial-place of his family. Towards
the end of his life he is said to have become as docile and
conciliatory as he had previously been passionate and vindictive.
He is praised by contemporary writers for having paid off
the debt of 22,000 marks on his see, for having built a goodly
hospital at Maidstone, and for having completed the stately
hall at Canterbury begun by Archbishop Hubert Walter.7
The name of Savoy Street, Strand, remains to mark the
site of a palace erected for Peter, a brother of Archbishop
Boniface.
7 Ibid., p. 119.
210
46. -ROBERT KILWARDBY, 1273 to 1278.
King of England : Edward I., 1272 to 1307.
Soon after the death of Boniface, the chapter of Canterbury,
having obtained licence from the king to appoint a new arch-
bishop, chose their prior, Adam de Chillenden. His appoint-
ment was opposed by the king and his eldest son, Prince
Edward, who desired the election of the chancellor, Robert
Burnell. Adam set out for Rome to sue for the confirma-
tion of his election,1 but was persuaded by Pope Gregory X.
to resign his claims. The pope refused* to confirm the
choice of the royal nominee, and chose for the vacant see on
his own authority Robert Kilwardby, a Dominican friar.
Kilwardby was by birth an Englishman, but of his parent-
age and early life nothing is known. He studied at the
universities of Oxford and Paris, where he distinguished himself
as a scholar and teacher, and later as the author of several
grammatical and theological works of considerable repute.
His residence in Paris had introduced him to the Dominicans,
who, since the foundation of their order by St. Dominic
early in the thirteenth century, had established them-
selves at all the chief seats of learning in Europe. After joining
the Dominican order at Oxford, Kilwardby devoted himself
exclusively to the study of theology, in which subject he
obtained a doctor's degree. In 1261, he was appointed
provincial prior of his order in England.3
The elevation of a member of their order to the see of Canter-
bury caused much satisfaction to the Black Friars. The
pope granted to Kilwardby permission to be consecrated by any
bishop whom he might choose. He accordingly selected
William Button, the saintly bishop of Bath and Wells, who,
assisted by twelve suffragans, performed the ceremony at
Canterbury on February 26, 1273.
1 Florence of Worcester's Chronicle, 1270.
2 Tanner, Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica, p. 455.
211
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
The pope had promised Adam de Chillenden that the 3,000
marks which had been spent on his election should be refunded
by the archbishop. To this arrangement Kilwardby demurred,
and before paying the money instituted an enquiry into the
life and morals of Adam. He then threatened to deprive
the prior of his office unless the sum demanded was reduced
by 1,300 marks, and to this Adam was forced to agree.3
In May, 1274, Archbishop Kilwardby, accompanied by
many of his suffragans, attended the General Council convened
by Pope Gregory X., at Lyons, for the purpose of uniting
Christendom in a new Crusade. The famous Dominican,
St. Thomas Aquinas, died while on his way to this council,
and St. Bonaventure, the Francisian, who took a prominent
part in the debates, died while the council was sitting.
The assembled clergy agreed to grant a tenth part of their
revenues for six years for the recovery of the Holy Land.
On August 19 of the same year, Kilwardby crowned King
Edward I. and his queen at Westminster. The accession
of this worthy prince caused great joy to the English people.
For the first time since the Conquest, England was ruled
by a monarch whose interests lay, not across the Channel,
but in his own kingdom.
As a Dominican friar, Kilwardby's interests were chiefly
theological, and he took little part in public affairs. He is
recorded to have excommunicated Llewellyn of Wales for
refusing to do homage to King Edward. The archbishop
devoted himself to the interests of his order and to the
visitation of his diocese. His earnest zeal to promote a
reform of morals caused him to be well received at most
churches whither he went. The canons of Osney, in Oxford-
shire-, complained, however, that the sum demanded from
them for procurations during his visit amounted to more than
three times as much as that which had been paid to his pre-
decessors.4 In 1276, he visited Oxford and condemned certain
erroneous opinions in grammar, theology, and natural philo-
sophy which were current in the university. With the con-
sent of the authorities he decreed that masters who continued
to teach these errors should be dismissed. As a friar Kilwardby
3 Godwin, Catal. of the Bishops of England, p. 119.
* Register of John Peckham (Rolls Series), I. 42.
212
Robert Kilwardby
supported the papal claims, but, nevertheless, succeeded in
remaining on good terms with the king.
On March 12, 1278, Pope Nicholas III. took the extra-
ordinary step of creating the archbishop of Canterbury
cardinal-bishop of Portus and Santa Rufina. The revenue
from this office was incomparably inferior to that derived
from the see of Canterbury, but Kilwardby was obliged to
accept it. Though the Dominicans pretended that additional
honour had been paid to him by his elevation to the cardinalate,
there is reason to suppose that the pope had been dissatisfied
with his administration of the see of Canterbury. His accep-
tance of the new office necessitated his resigning the arch-
bishopric in order to reside in Rome. Before setting out
he sold to the king all the crops and rents of his see for the
following year, and took with him 5,000 marks in money,
many valuable vestments and treasures, and all the register
and judicial records belonging to the cathedral. Though
his successor made repeated attempts to recover the registers
he did not succeed. Consequently that of John Peckham,
his successor, is the oldest of the Canterbury registers,
now preserved at Lambeth.5
Kilwardby was an aged man at the time of his departure
from England, and only lived a few months after reaching
Italy. He died on September 11, 1279, and was buried in the
Church of the Dominican monastery at Viterbo. The story
that he died by poison has no evidence to support it. Many
of his works are extant. Of these the most important are
" De Tempore " ; " De Universali " ; " De Relatione " ;
and " De Ortu Scientiarum." Matthew Paris states that the
latter work, of which there are two manuscript copies in the
Bodleian Library, was in his time considered a curious and
useful book. No less than thirty-nine philosophical treatises
are attributed to Kilwardby. He also divided the writings
of St. Augustine into chapters, to each of which he added a
commentary composed by himself.
s Martin's Preface to Register of John Peckham, p. XLI.
213
47— JOHN PECKHAM, 1279 to ^9^-
King of England : Edward I., 1272 to 1307.
After the departure to Rome of Robert Kilwardby, the
chapter of Canterbury, desiring to win the favour of King
Edward, appointed to the vacant see the chancellor, Robert
Burnell, who had been previously rejected by the pope.
(Vide Robert Kilwardby.) But Burnell, who now held along
with the chancellorship the bishopric of Bath and Wells,
and was the chief adviser of the king, refused to accept the
primacy, probably on the ground that it would have interfered
with his duties as a statesman. Pope Nicholas III., on his
own authority, then chose the Franciscan friar, John Peckham,
who at that time occupied the position of lecturer in theology
in the schools attached to the Vatican.
Peckham is believed to have been born in Sussex, but nothing
is known of his parentage. He received his early education
in the priory of Lewes, to which establishment he was after-
wards a great benefactor. After studying for some years
at Oxford, and at Paris, he became a tutor in the household
of an Angevin nobleman. About the year 1250 he resigned his
tutorship and took the Franciscan vows at Oxford. He then
resumed his studies, devoting himself chiefly to theology,
and took a doctor's degree at the university of Paris. There
he came in contact with the Dominican St. Thomas Aquinas,
and probably attended his lectures. He was present when
the latter was examined by the masters of theology concerning
his doctrine of the " unity of form."1 " We alone stood by
him," Peckham afterwards wrote, " defending him to the
best of our power, saving the truth."3
About the year 1275, Peckham was appointed ninth provin-
cial minister of his order in England. This post he filled
with great ability for two years, until he was summoned
1 G. Little, The Grey Friars in Oxford, p. 154.
2 Register of John Peckham (Rolls series) , p. 866.
214
John Peckham
to Rome to lecture on theology. His lectures were attended
by many of the cardinals, and by some of the greatest scholars
in Europe. His audience are said to have risen to their
feet and uncovered every time he entered the lecture hall.
The papal bull announcing his election to the see of Canter-
bury was issued in January, 1279, an(i ne was consecrated
by Pope Nicholas III. on March 12, six months before the
death of Robert Kilwardby. On his departure for England,
his official connection with the Franciscan order did not cease,
for the pope appointed him protector of the privileges of
the Friars Minor in England. In this capacity Peckham
afterwards frequently used his authority to benefit the Fran-
ciscans at the expense of the monks.3
One of his first acts after his arrival in England was to
summon an ecclesiastical council at Reading, and to authorize
the assembled clergy to excommunicate those who infringed
in various ways the rights of the Church. At this council
Peckham also issued statutes against the holding of livings
in plurality. These proceedings offended King Edward,
with whom the archbishop had had an interview at Amiens
on his way to England, and from whom he had received
a cordial welcome. The king forced the archbishop to with-
draw all constitutions passed at the council of Reading,
which prejudiced the royal prerogative.4 Shortly afterwards
the king passed what is known as the Statute of Mortmain,
forbidding the further acquisition of lands by religious
bodies lest they should fall into the " dead hand " of the
Church. This was a wise measure, for the nation was becom-
ing impoverished through land being held by persons exempt
from taxes or legal obligations. Though Edward continued
to the end of his reign in full communion with the Catholic
Church, he succeeded in a great measure in loosing the papal
bonds in which his grandfather John had involved the kingdom.
Before leaving Rome, Peckham had been forced to borrow
money from the pope to defray the expenses of his journey,
and of his enthronement at Canterbury. The pope lost no
time in demanding the repayment of the loan, and as Arch-
bishop Kilwardby had sold to the king a year's revenue of
» G. Little, The Grey Friars in Oxford, p. 155.
« Bartholomew Cotton, Hist. Anglicana (Rolls series), p. 158.
215
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the see, Peckham was for some time seriously embarrassed
for want of money.
During the Welsh war, the archbishop went to Wales
and attempted to mediate between the king and Prince
Llewellyn, but his mission was unsuccessful. After the
death of Llewellyn the archbishop took measures to bring
the Welsh Church into closer conformity with the Church of
England. He also spent much time in the visitation of his
province, and in some instances the suffragans complained
of the harsh manner in which the reform of various abuses
was carried out by him or by his officials.5 His zeal for
the Church caused him to form an exaggerated opinion
of the rights of his office, and he was constantly engaged in
controversies and litigations with the bishops and the monks.
Dean Hook describes him as a self-important little man,
pompous in his gait, and in his manner of expressing himself.
A dispute arose between the king and the archbishop con-
cerning the right of the latter to visit the royal chapels. The
pretensions of Peckham were resented by the king, who forbade
him to visit the chapels without the royal sanction. He was
accused of enmity towards the monks, who were at this time
bitterly opposed to the friars. It is related of him that
when provincial of his order, his humility prevented his
taking advantage of the indulgence granted him to ride on
a mule, and he consequently travelled long distances on foot.
There is a story that once when he was praying before a
crucifix, and complaining of the calumnies from which he
suffered, the image spoke to him words of comfort in rhyming
Latin.6 Some months before his death he sank into dotage,
and the bishop of Hereford received licence to confer orders
in his place. He died on December 8, 1292, and was buried
in the north aisle of Canterbury Cathedral, where his tomb of
Sussex marble, surmounted by a recumbent oak effigy, may
be seen.
Dominus Nicholas Trivet sums up his character in these
words : " He was a zealous promoter of the interests of his
order, an excellent maker of songs, of pompous manners
and speech, but of kind and thoroughly liberal heart."
s Johannes de Oxenedes, Chronica (Rolls series), p. 264.
6 Martin's Preface to Peckham 's Register (Rolls series), p. I^XI.
2l6
John Peckham
Peckham was a voluminous writer in prose and verse ; nine-
teen of his prose treatises and several poems are extant.
Of the former the following are considered the more important :
" Questiones de Vanitate Rerum Mundanarum " ; " Quod-
libitum " ; " De Paupertate " ; " Questiones de Sacramento
Eucharistiae" ; " De Sphaera " ; " Prospectiva." His poetry
includes a semi-religious poem called " Philomela." As
already related, the earliest registers of the see of Canter-
bury were taken to Rome by Archbishop Kilwardby (q.v.), and
were never recovered. Peckham's register, preserved at Lam-
beth, is the earliest of the Canterbury registers now in England.
It has been printed in the Rolls series, with a valuable intro-
duction by Mr. C. T. Martin. The first portion contains
Peckham's letters.
217
16
48.— ROBERT WINCHELSEA, 1294 to 1313.
Kings of England : Edward I., 1272 to 1307.
Edward II., 1307 to 1327.
Robert Winchelsea, who was probably the ablest prelate
to occupy the see of Canterbury since the death of
Stephen Langton, is said to have been born at Old Winchel-
sea, in Kent. Of his parentage nothing is known. At the
universities of Oxford and Paris he gained some reputation for
scholarship, and was made a prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral.
He was also appointed rector of the university of Paris,
and afterwards chancellor of Oxford. About the year 1283,
having obtained the patronage of Richard de Gravesend,
Bishop of London, he was made archdeacon of Essex, and
prebendary of Oxgate in St. Paul's. These offices he held
for ten years, during which time he became famous as a
preacher of great eloquence.1 With the approval of King
Edward I., Winchelsea was appointed to the see of Canterbury
by the chapter of Christ Church on February 13, 1293.
He immediately set out for Rome to have his election confirmed
by the pope, but on his arrival found the apostolic see vacant
through the death of Nicholas IV. For more than a year
the cardinals were unable to agree as to the choice of a new
pope, and Winchelsea, meantime, remained in Rome. His
handsome figure and genial manners won for him many
friends, who are said to have suggested to the cardinals
that they could not do better than choose him for the papal
chair.3 At length a holy hermit, named Peter Morrone
was elected pope, and took the name of Celestine V. He
was consecrated at Aquila, and there also on September 12,
1294, Robert Winchelsea received consecration from Gerard,
Cardinal of Sabina and Aquila.
The archbishop returned to England on January 1, 1295,
after an absence of nearly two years, having incurred enormous
1 Anglia Sacra, I., p. n. ■ Ibid., p.12.
2l8
Robert Winchelsea
expense by his long sojourn in Rome. King Edward I., who
was then in the marches of Wales, refused to invest Winchelsea
with the temporalities of his see by proxy. The archbishop
accordingly proceeded to Wales, and found Edward at
Aberconway. When required to take the oath of homage
he showed some hesitation, but at length declared that he
took it in the same sense as his predecessors, the archbishops
of Canterbury, had taken it, or ought to have taken it. The
king was surprised at this proviso, but after a short pause
said : " We restore to you the temporalities."3
The archbishop was enthroned at Canterbury on October 2,
1295, in the presence of Edward I., his son, Prince Edward,
and the king's brother Edmund. Winchelsea practised
charity to the poor on a magnificent scale, and protected the
friars, at the expense of the monks. Every Sunday and Thurs-
day he distributed 2,000 loaves to the poor.4 He was cheerful
in the society of men, but seldom condescended to address
women except in the confessional. His zeal as a churchman
involved him in constant quarrels with the king, the suffragans
and the monks.
King Edward's many wars forced him to demand heavy
taxes from his subjects, and he determined that the clergy
should contribute their share as well as the laity. The
clergy appear fto have been willing to agree to this, but in
1296, Pope Boniface VIII. issued his famous bull, " Clericis
laicos," in which he forbade the laity of whatsoever rank
to tax the clergy. Laymen receiving such money were to
be excommunicated, and clergy who submitted to such taxes
were to be deposed.5
Edward I. refused to yield to the pope's threats, and at
a parliament which met at Bury St. Edmunds in November,
1296, it was decreed that those who refused to contribute to
the support of the temporal power should no longer enjoy
its protection. This placed the clergy in a state of outlawry.
Their possessions were seized, and they were subjected to
violence of all kinds, against which the law refused to protect
them.
3 William Somner, The Antiquities of Canterbury, p. 57.
* Ibid., p. 71.
s Henderson's Hist. Documents, pp. 432 to 434.
219
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Archbishop Winchelsea was determined to obey the pope's
orders at all costs, and commanded the clergy to follow his
example. At length, however, he was urged by the persecuted
prelates to summon a synod, at which he declared that he
left it to their conscience whether or not they should agree to
the royal demands. For himself his conscience would not
permit him to offer money for the king's protection, or on
any other pretext. The majority of the clergy then agreed
to give one-fifth of their revenues to the king.
The whole of the archbishop's property was seized by
the king's orders, and he retired with a single chaplain
to a country parsonage, where he lived for some months on
the alms of the parishioners. His property remained in
Edward's hands for over five months, and all who attempted
to shelter him were threatened with the king's vengeance.6
In the summer of 1297, Edward I. set out with his army
for Flanders. Before his departure a reconciliation took
place between him and Winchelsea, whose lands were
restored to him. The latter promised to appeal to the
pope for leave to grant the king what was necessary for his
wars. The primate was present at the affecting meeting
outside Westminster Hall on July 14, when the king bade
farewell to his people, and recommended his son to their care.
Winchelsea and many others wept on hearing the king's
speech.
In 1299, the Scottish Regency appealed to Pope Boniface
VIII. to protect them against the claims of Edward I. to exer-
cise feudal superiority over the country. Boniface declared
that Scotland was a fief of the Roman see, and being conse-
quently under his protection, the English king had no claim
to suzerainty. Archbishop Winchelsea was entrusted with
a papal letter forbidding Edward to further molest the Scots.
The king was then in Scotland, and thither the archbishop
proceeded in order to deliver the letter. An interesting
account has been preserved of his hazardous journey north.
The king received the pope's letter courteously, and soon
afterwards withdrew from Scotland for the time being.
The nobles, were, however, highly incensed by the pope's
claim, and a reply was sent to him in their name, declaring that
6 Somner, Antiq. of Cant., p. 71.
220
Robert Winchelsea
Scotland had never been a fief of the Roman see, and that
from early times the Scottish kings had done homage for the
kingdom to the kings of England.7 After the fall of Pope
Boniface VIII. , the position of Archbishop Winchelsea became
less secure. The Roman Church was now divided by the great
schism, and for the next seventy years — a period known in the
history of the papacy as that of the Babylonish Captivity —
the papal court resided at Avignon in France. The French
pope, Clement V., was desirous of keeping on good terms with
King Edward, and even supported him against the archbishop.
The Earls of Hereford and Norfolk had headed a revolt of
the people against Edward's oppressive taxation, and, during
the king's absence abroad, Archbishop Winchelsea seems to
have been suspected of plotting with these noblemen against
the royal authority. His guilt does not appear to have been
proved, however, and considerable obscurity exists as to the
real cause of his disgrace.
About the close of the year 1305, Pope Clement V. was
induced by King Edward to suspend the archbishop from all
his ecclesiastical and temporal functions, and to summon
him to appear at Avignon within two months. On receiving
the papal mandate, Winchelsea hastened to the king's
presence, and implored his mercy with tears. So abject was
his humility at this interview that it was afterwards regarded
as a proof of his guilt. Edward heaped reproaches on him,
accusing him of treachery and ingratitude. He also assured
him that never with the royal consent would he be permitted
to return to England.8
The archbishop remained abroad until after the death
of King Edward I., which occurred on July 7, 1307. One of the
first acts of Edward II. was to recall him to England.9 The
anxieties which he had endured had affected his health, and
he was unable to return to England in time for the
coronation of Edward II., who was crowned by the bishop
of Winchester.
Winchelsea exercised considerable influence over the
weak-minded and vicious King Edward II., whose excesses
he occasionally succeeded in restraining. He also supported
1 cf. Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, III., 372.
» Ibid. ' cf. Cal. of Papal Letters, Vol. II., p. 33.
221
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the barons against the royal favourite, Piers Gaveston, who
was executed in 1312.
During the last years of his life, the archbishop took part
in the suppression of the order of Knights Templars, which
had been decreed by Pope Clement V. at the council of
Vienna in 1311. This religious and military order had
been founded in 1118, for the protection of pilgrims to the
Holy Land. Many writers attribute the charges of immorality
and sacrilege brought against the Templars to the avarice of
Philip of France, who desired to seize their wealth. Philip
had caused the Templars in France to be seized and imprisoned
and under torture many had confessed to the horrible charges
brought against them. A like fate overtook them in
England.
During the greater part of his episcopate Winchelsea was
involved in a quarrel with the monks of St. Augustine's, whom
the pope supported against him. In 1300, Boniface VIII.
issued an edict exempting the monastery from all episcopal
jurisdiction.
Archbishop Winchelsea died at Otford on May 11, 1313,
and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral. Miracles are said
to have been wrought at his tomb, and an ineffectual attempt
was made to procure his canonization.
222
49 —WALTER REYNOLDS, 1313 to 1327.
Kings of England : Edward II., 1307 to 1327.
Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
Some months before the death of Archbishop Winchelsea,
Pope Clement V., probably at the desire of Edward II., had
issued a bull reserving to himself the right to appoint a new
archbishop of Canterbury. The chapter of Christ Church
suspecting, not without reason, that the king intended the
archiepiscopal see for one of his unworthy favourites,
hastened, on the death of Winchelsea, to appoint a primate
of their own choice in the person of Thomas Cobham, Arch-
deacon of Lewes, a prelate of illustrious birth and attain-
ments who had previously been chancellor of Cambridge.1
The king lost no time, however, in persuading the pope to
annul the election of Cobham, and to appoint his old tutor
Walter Reynolds, Bishop of Worcester.
Walter Reynolds was the son of a Windsor baker, and is
said to have received an imperfect education. The last
statement is, however, open to doubt, since he was appointed
by Edward I. as tutor to his son. The rectories of Wimbledon
in Surrey and Sawbridge in Hertfordshire were granted to
him in the life-time of Edward I.
The skill of Reynolds as an amateur actor is said to have
first won the favour of the dissolute prince whose affections
were more frequently bestowed on buffoons and actors than
on persons of his own rank.2 He appointed Reynolds his
treasurer, and keeper of his wardrobe, an office which could
have been no sinecure, for the rector was expected to find
means of replenishing the purse of the profligate prince,
after his angry father had cut off supplies.
After the accession of the prince as Edward II., abundant
1 Anglia Sacra, I., 18.
2 cf. Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, III., 455.
223
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
honours were lavished on Reynolds. He obtained a prebend
in St. Paul's, the office of royal treasurer, and in October 13,
1308, was consecrated bishop of Worcester. Two years
later the great seal was committed to his keeping. The
election of Reynolds to the see of Canterbury was regarded
with disfavour by all classes in England. It is probable that
the clergy and barons would have openly rebelled against
the king's choice, had it not immediately followed a reconcilia-
tion between them and Edward, who required their help
against the Scots.
For three months after his elevation to the primacy,
Reynolds retained the office of chancellor, but resigned it in
order to accompany Edward II. to Scotland.3 The king's
defeat at Bannockburn was followed by another baronial
revolt, and on more than one occasion Reynolds was employed
as an intermediary in the attempts to effect a pacification
between the king and the barons. Edward's attachment to
a young noble named Hugh le Despenser, involved him in fresh
trouble and disgrace. On this man and his aged father the
king bestowed great estates and enormous wealth. The
barons insisted that these favourites should be banished,
but they were afterwards recalled. Archbishop Reynolds,
as in duty bound, warmly supported the king against the
barons. He convened an ecclesiastical synod at St. Paul's,
and declared the sentence against the Despensers to be
illegal.4 He also persuaded the clergy to grant to the king
such subsidies as the necessity of the state demanded.
In his ecclesiastical policy, Archbishop Reynolds seems
to have been actuated by a genuine desire for reform.
He obtained from Pope Clement V. a series of eight bulls,
granting him authority to exercise special privileges while
engaged in the visitation of his provinces. These privileges
were afterwards confirmed to him by John XXII., the
successor of Clement. One of these bulls gave him authority
to limit pluralities. Another prohibited the suffragans of
Canterbury from holding visitations for three years in order
that the metropolitan might conduct his visitations without
impediment. A third privileged the archbishop to give an
3 Ibid.
* Chronicle of the Reigns of Ed. I. and Ed. II. (Rolls Series), I., 300.
224
Walter Reynolds
indulgence for all crimes committed within a hundred days
past to any persons who should show themselves penitent and
confess to him in his visitation.5
The old controversy concerning the supremacy of Canter-
bury over York was renewed at this time. William Melton,
Archbishop of York, had been chosen royal treasurer by
Edward II., an appointment which seems to have aroused the
jealousy of Reynolds. In 1317 the archbishop of Canterbury
placed London under an interdict because Archbishop Melton
had been permitted to pass through the city unchallenged with
his cross erect.6
The relations of Reynolds with King Edward had
gradually become less friendly, and in 1324, a quarrel
took place between them concerning the trial of Adam of
Orlton, Bishop of Hereford. Adam had been accused of high
treason and deposed from his see. Reynolds boldly defended
Orlton against the king, and at the trial appeared to support
him accompanied by the whole hierarchy of England and
Wales. The archbishop afterwards succeeded in bringing
about a reconciliation between Orlton and the king.
When the quarrel arose between Queen Isabella and the
king, the archbishop seems, at first, to have hesitated which
side to take. The anxiety which he endured for some time
is said to have brought on a severe illness. After the deposition
of the king, he fled to the country and lived for several
weeks in retirement near Maidstone. On January 8, 1327,
after making his submission to the queen, he preached at
Westminster Hall, from the text " Vox populi, vox Dei,"
a sermon in which he justified the revolution.7 He afterwards
crowned young Edward III. at Westminster on February 1.
The deposed king was murdered at Berkeley Castle,
on September 21, 1327, and his old tutor survived him
only a few weeks. The archbishop died at his manor
of Mortlake on November 16, 1327, and was honourably
buried in Canterbury Cathedral by John Stratford, Bishop of
Winchester. It is said that none mourned him save the monks
of Christ Church, whom he had befriended, and whose prior,
s Wilkins' Concilia, II., pp. 431 to 436.
6 Ibid, 281.
1 Chronicon de Lanercost, p. 258.
225
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Henry of Eastry, was his chief friend and adviser in
his later years. On the monastery of Christ Church he
bestowed many privileges, and gave the manor of Caldecot
which belonged to his archbishopric, to the monks " pro
solaciis eorundem."8
8 Anglia Sacra, I., p. 18.
226
50. SIMON MEOPHAM (OR MEPEHAM)
1328 to 1333.
King of England : Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
Archbishop Simon Mepeham, concerning whose early life
little is known, derived his name from the village of Meopham
in Kent. The Register of Archbishop John Peckham (q. v.),
shows that towards the close of the thirteenth century at
least five Meophams, brothers or relatives, were admitted to
holy orders at different times. Though Simon is stated
to have been poor in worldly goods, his family evidently
possessed estates at Meopham. A document has been pre-
served in which Simon, in conjunction with his brother-in-law
Edward de la Dene, grants land in mortmain to the parish
church of Meopham for the repose of the souls of his sister
Joan and other relatives.1
After a course of study at Oxford, where he is said to have
been a student of Merton College, Simon took the degree of
doctor of theology. In the year 1297 he was ordained
to the rectory of Tunstall in the diocese of Norwich, and
prebends at Llandaff and Chichester were afterwards conferred
on him. On the death of Archbishop Reynolds, the party of
Queen Isabella and Lord Mortimer attempted to secure the
primacy for a prelate attached to their own interests, but the
chapter of Canterbury, supported by the constitutionalists,
hastened to make a canonical election, their choice falling on
the canon of Chichester.3
On January 6, 1328, King Edward III. gave his consent to
the election of Simon, and shortly afterwards granted him
a safe conduct for one year in order that he3 might proceed
to the papal court at Avignon. John XXII. seems to have
hesitated to confirm Mepeham's election, and we may infer
that the pope was at this time uncertain of the strength of
* Col. of Pat. Rolls (1327-1330), p. 62.
1 Anglia Sacra, I. 48. 3 Ibid., p. 199.
227
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Queen Isabella's party. Letter after letter was written by the
king and the nobles declaring that the see of Canterbury was
suffering from the vacancy and urging the pope to consecrate
Mepeham.4 At length on May 25, 1328, Simon was conse-
crated in the church of the Dominicans at Avignon, by Peter,
Cardinal Bishop of Palestrina. A fortnight later the pallium
was bestowed on him. He did not return to England until
Sept. 5, and on the 19th did homage to Edward III., at Lynn,
in Norfolk, for the temporalities of his see.5
During Simon's absence abroad his brothers Edmund and
Thomas had been occupied in engaging servants for his
household, and so scrupulous did they show themselves in
making choice only of pious persons that it was declared
they were seeking angels rather than men {" angelos et non
homines quaesierunt ad hoc opus").6 Soon after his return to
England, Simon was summoned to London to the deathbed
of his brother Edmund. Before leaving the city he preached
in St. Paul's.
In the following January (1329), Simon held an ecclesias-
tical council at St. Paul's, London, when a number of constitu-
tions were passed. The strict observance of Good Friday
as a day of rest was decreed, and a new festival, that of the
Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, was instituted.
In order that poor men might have freedom to bequeath their
estates, it was decreed that no fees should be demanded for the
execution of wills, when the value of the property amounted
to less than one hundred shillings. At the same council,
those who had taken part in the murder of Bishop Stapleton
of Exeter, during the disturbances which followed the
deposition of Edward II., were excommunicated.7
Simon Mepeham had no ability as a politician and took little
part in secular affairs. But so great was the energy which he
showed in the visitation of his province that he involved
himself in constant quarrels with his suffragans. He began
with the see of Rochester, of which the bishop, Haymo Heath,
was accused of certain misdeeds, such as failing to preach in
4 Wilkins' Concilia, II., pp. 539 to 544.
s Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I. and Edward II. (Rolls series),
I. p. 341.
• Anglia Sacra, I. 368. » Wilkins' Concilia, II. pp. 552 to 554-
228
Simon Meopham
his own diocese, leaving children unconfirmed, and of granting
letters of dispensation for non-residence.8 It is pleasant to
record that though Bishop Heath was severely censured, he
afterwards became the firm friend of Mepeham and con-
tinued so until his death.
At Exeter, the archbishop arrived with a splendid retinue,
and escorted by eighty armed men, but found the cathedral
doors locked and barred. The bishop, John Grandison, with
whom Mepeham had previously had a dispute, determined
to resist his visitation by force of arms. The archbishop was
unable to obtain entrance to the cathedral, but remained for
some days in the neighbourhood. As it was feared that a
battle would take place between the armed followers of the
prelates, the king sent messengers to Mepeham ordering him to
desist from proceeding with his visitation, and the primate
was forced to withdraw from the neighbourhood.9
A dispute soon afterwards arose between Mepeham and the
monks of St. Augustine's concerning the right of jurisdiction
over certain churches and chapels. The monks appealed to
the pope, and Icherius of Concoreto, Canon of Salisbury, was
appointed to decide the case. He cited Mepeham to appear
before him, but the archbishop refused to obey the summons,
and shortly afterwards retired to his manor of Slindon in
Sussex.
On a certain day when the primate was confined to bed
through illness, a deputation from the monks, headed by their
proctor, Natendon, and the public notary, arrived at Slindon,
for the purpose of serving a writ on him. His servants treated
the deputation with scanty respect, and appear to have
insulted the notary whose arm was broken in the scuffle.
They also drenched the proctor with cold water.10
The indignant monks appealed to Pope John XXII. to
redress this outrage, for which the archbishop was held re-
sponsible. The suffragans of Canterbury generously united
in defence of their primate. Letters from them are extant
addressed to the pope, in which they declare that the Lord
Simon had been known to some of them for ten and to others
for twenty and even thirty years ; that he was a man of honest
8 Ibid., p. 556. 9 Anglia Sacra, I. p. 19.
10 Thorn's Chronica (Twysden's edition) p. 2040.
229
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
conversation, compliant, gentle, humble and benevolent,
illustrious for the innocency of his life, and of good reputation
throughout the realm of England.11
Though the archbishop declared that he had had no know-
ledge of the insults offered to the deputation, judgment was
declared against him by the papal commissioners, and he
was ordered to pay a heavy fine within sixty days on pain of
excommunication. As he refused to submit, the sentence was
duly pronounced against him. Sad at heart, and in failing
health, he retired to his manor of Mayfield, in Sussex.
He continued for some time, however, to exercise his archi-
episcopal functions, and declared to his friend, Bishop Haymo
Heath, that he was not troubled by the excommunication.
He died on October 12, 1333, and was buried in Canterbury
Cathedral in the chapel of St. Peter.
Ibid., p. 2045.
230
5i— JOHN DE STRATFORD, 1333 to 1348.
King of England : Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
John de Stratford, who succeeded Archbishop Mepeham
in the see of Canterbury, was born at Stratf ord-on-Avon , in
Warwickshire, where he and his brother Robert owned pro-
perty. His parents, Robert and Isabel, were apparently
in easy circumstances, for they provided their son with an
excellent education. Ralph Hatton de Stratford, Bishop of
London, is believed to have been his nephew.
John took his degree as Doctor of Laws at Merton College,
Oxford. As early as the year 1317, he appears to have occu-
pied some official position, for twice in that year, and once in
the next, he was summoned among certain legal persons to
advise with the council on important matters which con-
cerned the State. He was also summoned to parliament in
the four following years, and, from the place in which his
name occurs, it would seem that he was either an officer in
the Exchequer or a clerk in the Chancery. By Archbishop
Walter Reynolds he was appointed chief judge of the
ecclesiastical Court of Arches, so called because it met in
the church of St. Mary-le-Bow. Previous to this, he had
apparently taken orders, for he held prebends in the
cathedrals of Lincoln and York, and in 1319, was appointed
archdeacon of Lincoln.1
From 1321 to 1323, he was engaged as an ambassador to the
papal court of Avignon on business connected with Scotland.
On April 12, 1323, his colleague, Reginald de Asser, Bishop
of Winchester, died suddenly at Avignon, and it fell to the pope
to elect a successor to the vacant see. King Edward II. wrote
to John, urging him to use his influence with the pope for the
election of Robert de Baldeck, a royal favourite. But the
pope's choice fell on John himself, who was consecrated to
1 Ed. Foss, The Judges of England, Vol. III., p. 515.
231
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the see of Winchester by the cardinal of Albano on June
26, 1323.
On his return to England, Edward II., in great wrath at his
acceptance of the bishopric, dismissed him from all his offices.
For a whole year, the king refused to invest him with the
temporalities of his see. At length Pope John XXII. inter-
ceded on his behalf, and he was permitted to purchase the
royal favour by a bond of 10,000 pounds.2 No part of this
sum was, however, demanded from him during the reign of
Edward II.
After the murder of the king, Stratford joined the party of
Henry of Lancaster, and so incurred the enmity of Queen
Isabella and Lord Mortimer. The latter demanded that he
should now pay 1,000 pounds of the sum promised in the
previous reign, and on his inability to pay more being proved,
it was counselled that he should be put to death. Stratford
only saved himself by going into hiding.3
Immediately after the execution of Mortimer, Stratford
was recalled, and appointed chancellor by Edward III. He
now became the young king's most trusted adviser. In April,
1331, he was chosen to accompany the king and Lord Montacute
to France. They travelled in the disguise of merchants,
for the professed purpose of visiting certain famous shrines.
During his sojourn in France, Edward had a private interview
with the French king.4
On the death of Simon Mepeham, Stratford was translated,
at the king's desire, to the primacy on November 3, 1333.
Early in the following year, he went abroad on the king's
business, and, while in Ponthieu, received the pallium from
the pope, at the hands of Bishop Haymo Heath of Rochester.
A few months later, he resigned the great seal, but in June,
1335, it was restored to him, and retained by him for two
years, until it was bestowed on his brother, Robert de Stratford,
Bishop of Chichester. During that time he can have had
little leisure for his ecclesiastical duties, for he was constantly
employed on embassies to France, and other powers, and in
presiding over the council during the king's absence abroad.
2 Blaneford's Chronicle (Rolls series), pp. 147 to 148.
s Anglia Sacra, I., 20.
4 W. Longman's Life and Times of Ed. III., II., 47.
232
John de Stratford
He is said to have crossed the Channel thirty-two times in
the public service.5
In April, 1340, he was appointed chancellor for the third
time, but in the following June resigned the seal on account of
his increasing infirmities, and it was again entrusted to his
brother, Bishop Robert. The power wielded by the arch-
bishop as chief adviser to the king had roused the jealousy of
a party among the nobles, who determined to effect his down-
fall. Meantime, the king's French wars had emptied the
exchequer, and Stratford was unable to meet the increased
demands for money. The archbishop had, from the first,
disapproved of the French war, and his enemies accused him
of deliberately restricting the supplies. After the defeat at
Tournay, the king's allies became pressing in their demands
for money.
On November 30, 1340, Edward III. suddenly returned
to England. His first act was to dismiss the archbishop's
brother, Robert, from the chancellorship. He then ordered
certain of the judges to be imprisoned and sent for the
archbishop. Stratford, instead of obeying the summons,
sought refuge with the monks of Canterbury, and declared that
he would only submit to the judgment of his peers. Edward
issued a document called the Libellus Famosus, in which he
accused the archbishop of having defrauded him of the
promised funds, of having thus caused the failure of his expe-
dition, and of being responsible for all the disasters of the last
eight years.
When the parliament met at Westminster, in April,
Stratford presented himself with the other lords, but was
refused admittance to the Painted Chamber, where the bishops
were sitting. He forced his way in, however, and was at
length permitted to take his seat. The lords supported his
appeal to their jurisdiction, and the case was decided in his
favour. A reconciliation then took place between him and
the king, and at the next parliament, which met in April,
1343, the proceedings against him were withdrawn as being
contrary to reason and truth.6
During the last years of his life, the archbishop was occupied
chiefly with ecclesiastical affairs, and in the visitation of his
5 The Judges of England, III., 516. 6 Ibid.
233
16
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
diocese. He was appointed head of the council left as
advisers to the king's son Lionel, to whom the custody
of the kingdom was entrusted during Edward's absence at
the campaign of Crecy. Several interesting letters, addressed
to him by Edward III. during this campaign, have been
preserved.7
Archbishop Stratford died at Mayfield in Sussex on
August 23, 1348, and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral.
His career proves him to have been a statesman of unusual
ability. Though he was a better lawyer than an ecclesiastic,
his genial character, charity to the poor, and liberality to the
Church are acknowledged by all his biographers. He built
and generously endowed a college for priests at his native
town of Stratford-on-Avon. Many of his letters and some
of his sermons have been preserved.
» Merimuth and Avebury, Chronicle (Rolls series), pp. 200, 201.
391 to 395-
234
52.— THOMAS BRADWARDINE, 1349.
King of England : Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
Shortly after the death of Archbishop Stratford, the monks
of Christ Church, thinking to anticipate the wishes of King
Edward III., and without waiting for the conge d' elite, elected
to the see of Canterbury Thomas Bradwardine, one of the
greatest scholars of his age. The king, offended by the monks'
presumption, and determined to show his authority,
annulled the election of Bradwardine, whom he had intended
to nominate, and chose in his stead, John of Ufford, Dean of
Lincoln. This prelate was a distinguished statesman, who
had rendered great service to the king, but at the time of his
election to the see of Canterbury, he was aged and paralytic.
Though he did homage to the king for the temporalities of his
see in November, 1348, his consecration was unduly delayed,
probably on account of the plague which then raged.
In the midst of the rejoicing which followed Edward's
victories in France, a terrible pestilence known as the Black
Death swept over Europe. Travelling westward from
China, it reached the sea-port towns of Dorsetshire in 1348.
This plague continued to rage in England for nearly two years,
during which time about a third of the whole population are
believed to have perished. Many monasteries were entirely
depopulated. The aged Primate-elect, John of Ufford, was
destined to be one of the many victims. He died of the
pestilence at Tottenham, on May 20, 1349, without having
received consecration.
All parties were now unanimous in choosing Bradwardine
for the vacant see. Thomas, who is known in ecclesiastical
history as the " Doctor Profundus," enjoyed at this time a
European reputation for learning. He was born at Chichester
about the year 1290, and is believed to have derived his
surname from the village of Bradwardine, in Herefordshire,
to which his family may have originally belonged. As a
235
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
scholar of Merton College, Oxford, he won much distinction
for his skill in mathematics, a science in which he is said to have
had no equal. During his residence at the university he com-
posed a number of mathematical treatises, which have been
preserved.1
Through the patronage of Richard Bury, Bishop of Durham,
who employed him, along with other Merton men, in the collec-
tion and arrangement of his famous library, he was made
chancellor of St. Paul's, to which office a prebend was attached.
He was also made a non-residential canon of Lincoln Cathedral.
On the recommendation of Archbishop Stratford and the
Bishop of Durham, he was appointed one of the royal chap-
lains. In this capacity he acted as confessor to Edward III.
during the famous campaign of Crecy. So profound was
the impression produced on the army by his piety that the
soldiers declared their victories to be due as much to the
chaplain's prayers as to King Edward's generalship.2
At the time of his election to the see of Canterbury, Brad-
wardine was abroad. He proceeded to Avignon for his
consecration, which took place on July 19, 1349. A few days
previous to his arrival, the pope, who was at this time completely
in the power of Edward III., is said to have declared that if
the king nominated a jackass to the see of Canterbury he
would be forced to consecrate him. In consequence of
this speech, Hugo, Cardinal of Tudela, indulged in a little
horseplay, during the festivities which followed the consecra-
tion of Bradwardine. Dressed as a clown, he entered the
hall riding on a jackass and humbly petitioned that he might
be consecrated archbishop of Canterbury. Considering
Bradwardine's high reputation for piety and scholarship*
the joke was regarded as being in extremely bad taste, and
was deeply resented by the other cardinals.3
On learning the extent to which the Black Death was
ravaging the country, Bradwardine, like a true soldier, hastened
to England. On August 19 he landed at Dover, and on the
following day received the temporalities of his see from the
king at Eltham. He then proceeded to London where he
was received as a guest at a house at Lambeth, known as
' Henry Savile's Preface to De Causa Dei, (London, 161 8).
* Anglia Sacra, I., 42. 3 Ibid., p. 43.
236
Thomas Bradwardine
La Place, belonging to the bishop of Rochester. On the
morning after his arrival he was taken ill, and symptoms
of plague soon developed. He died on August 26, 1349,
after four days' illness.4 His body was conveyed to Canterbury
and buried privately in the cathedral. His most famous
work is a treatise in three books, entitled " De Causa Dei
contra Pelagium et de Virtute causarum ad suas Mertonenses.' '
This work was originally delivered in the form of lectures
to the students of Merton College. It is a folio of 876 pages,
and was published in London in 1618, by Henry Savile, to
whose preface we owe most of the information obtainable
concerning the life of Bradwardine.
His other works are : — Astronomical Tables descriptive
of the conjunctions and oppositions of the heavenly bodies ;
" Tractatus de Proportionibus " ; " De Quadratura Circuli " ;
" De Arithmetica Speculativa " ; " Ars Memorativa."
The following reference to Bradwardine in Chaucer's
"Nun's Priest's Tale," in a passage in which the author discusses
the question of man's free will, shows that the archbishop's
works had attained considerable reputation before the close
of the fourteenth century.
"But I ne cannot boult it to the bren,
As can the holy doctor, St. Austin.
Or Boece, or the Bishop Bradwardyn."
« Henry Savile's Preface.
237
53— SIMON ISLIP, 1349 t0 I366-
King of England : Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
In September, 1349, the chapter of Canterbury, at the request
of King Edward III., elected to the vacant see Simon Islip,
one of the royal chaplains and keeper of the privy seal.
Pope Clement VI., desiring to show his authority, but not
daring to set aside the appointment of the royal nominee,
solemnly declared that he annulled the election made by the
chapter, but that on his own authority he elected Simon Islip
to the primacy.1
Simon is believed to have derived his surname from the
village of Islip, on the Cherwell, in Oxfordshire. Nothing is
known of his parentage, but mention occurs of several of his
namesakes or kinsmen in ecclesiastical and other documents of
this period. After graduating in canon and civil law at Merton
College, Oxford, he obtained the patronage of Archbishop
Stratford (q. v.) and of Henry Burghersh, Bishop of Lincoln.
Among the preferments held by him at different times were
the archdeaconries of Canterbury and Stow, the rectories of
Easton, near Stamford, and Horncastle, and prebends in the
cathedrals of Lincoln, Lichfield and St. Paul's. He was also
made dean of the Court of the Arches. About the year 1343,
he attached himself to the royal service, and became one of the
most trusted counsellers of Edward III. During the king's
absence at the campaign of Crecy he was appointed one of the
council left as advisers to the king's son Lionel, to whom the
custody of the kingdom was entrusted (vide John de
Stratford).
Simon was consecrated in St. Paul's, London, on December
20, 1349, by Ralph, Bishop of London, and received the
pallium at Esher, on March 25, 1350, from the hands of the
bishop of Winchester. As the plague still raged, the public
entertainments customary at the enthronement of an arch-
1 Anglia Sacra, I., p. 43.
238
Simon I slip
bishop did not take place. Many people unjustly attributed
this to the archbishop's well-known character for parsimony.
During Islip's primacy, the long-continued dispute concern-
ing the claims of the archbishop of York was at length settled.
It was agreed that the northern primate should be permitted
to have his cross carried erect within the province of
Canterbury on condition that he and his successors each paid
to the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury, within two months
of the confirmation of their election, a golden image of an
archbishop holding a cross, or a jewel of the value of forty
pounds.2 This payment implied, without actually stating, the
supremacy of Canterbury. The agreement was confirmed
by King Edward III. and by Pope Clement VI.
Archbishop Islip showed great energy in promoting ecclesi-
astical reform, and in the visitation of his province. In 1351,
1359, and 1362, he published three different series of
ecclesiastical constitutions. In the first of these he decreed
that clergy accused of misconduct should be treated with
greater severity than had formerly been the case. He also
insisted on the stricter keeping of Sunday, by prohibiting
markets on that day, but wisely directed that business should
not be suspended on the numerous saints' days which were
observed at that period.3
His zeal brought him into conflict with his suffragans on
several occasions, and Bishop Gynwell, of Lincoln, obtained a
bull from Pope Clement VI., absolving him from obedience to
the see of Canterbury. The archbishop appealed against
this decree, and the pope, after investigating the case, with-
drew the special privileges granted to the see of Lincoln.
Disputes also arose between Archbishop Islip and the Black
Prince, whose arbitrary disposition rendered him unpopular
among the clergy. Robert de Stretton, a blind and paralytic
old man, had been nominated by the prince to the see of
Coventry and Lichfield, but the archbishop refused to conse-
crate him. The prince then appealed to the pope, who
ordered Robert to be instituted in spite of the archbishop's
opposition.4
2 Ibid., pp. 43 to 44.
« Wilkins' Concilia, III., p. 29.
* Anglia Sacra, I., 44.
239
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
In 1350, Islip was present at the institution of the famous
Order of the Garter by Edward III. The most important
ecclesiastical enactments during this primacy were the passing
of the two great statutes of " Provisors " and " Praemunire."
By the first of these, which was passed by the parliament in
135 1, it was decreed that the pope should no longer have the
right to present to English benefices. Persons accepting
such " provision " of the pope were to be imprisoned. In
1353, the Statute of Praemunire was passed, forbidding appeals
to the papal courts. Those who drew out of the realm any
plea that pertained to the king's courts, were to appear before
the royal justices to answer to the king for the contempt done
to his jurisdiction. If they failed to do this, their estates
were to be forfeited.
The Black Death had swept away more than half the clergy
in England, and to supply their places many illiterate persons
were admitted to holy orders. To remedy this state of
matters, Archbishop Islip established a college at Oxford
for the education of poor students who were natives of
Canterbury. Permission was obtained from the king to endow
it with the revenues of certain manors belonging to the arch-
bishopric. Accommodation was provided for eleven fellows
in addition to the warden and chaplain. As first warden, Islip
appointed Dr. John Woodhall, but he appears to have been
unfit for the post,5 and was driven out by the secular students
who predominated. In his place a certain John Wyclif
was appointed, who has been identified by some writers
with the famous reformer, but the evidence for this is not con-
clusive. After the death of Islip, his college was reserved
exclusively for the education of monks from Christ Church,
Canterbury. In the reign of Henry VIII., it was incorporated
with Christ Church College, Oxford.
In January, 1363, Archbishop Islip was riding from Otford
to Mayfield, when he fell from his horse, in a miry place, and
got wet through. On reaching his destination, he fell asleep
in his wet clothes. Awaking some hours later, he took his
place at table, but could articulate only with difficulty, and it
was soon discovered that he was suffering from a shock of
s Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, Vol. IV., p. 122.
240
Simon Islip
paralysis.6 He recovered the partial use of his speech, and,
during the next two years, resumed his archiepiscopal functions.
He died at Mayfield on April 26, 1366, and was buried in
Canterbury Cathedral. True to his principle of economy,
he had left directions that his funeral should be conducted
with as little expense as possible, and his wishes in this respect
were carried out.
By his will, he bequeathed to the convent of Christ Church
many rich vestments, valuable pieces of plate and 1,000 ewes,
the number of which was never to be diminished, but the
offspring and wool were to become the property of the prior
and convent. In return for this bequest he required that
a certain prayer should ever be offered for the repose of his
soul, after the daily mass.7 He also conferred a permanent
endowment on the Canterbury hospitals, and granted certain
parsonages to the monks of Dover and Bilsington.
6 Anglia Sacra, I., 45.
7 Hist. MSS. Cotnm., 5th report, p. 436.
241
54— SIMON LANGHAM, 1366 to 1368.
King of England: Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
On the death of Archbishop Islip, William of Edendon, Bishop
of Winchester, was nominated by Edward III. to the vacant
see, but he declined to accept it. The king then chose
Simon Langham, Bishop of Ely, and Chancellor of England, one
of the most distinguished statesmen of his time.
Concerning Langham's family nothing is known. He is
believed to have been born at the village of Langham, in
Rutlandshire, whence he derived his surname. About the
year 1335, he became a monk at St. Peter's, Westminster, to
which monastery he remained a generous friend to the end of
his life.
In April, 1349, he was made prior, and a month later was
chosen abbot in succession to Simon de Burcheston, who had
died of the plague. This office he held with much credit for
thirteen years, and succeeded in paying off all the debts of the
monastery out of his own savings.1 His skilful management
of the monastic revenues brought him to the notice of King
Edward III., who appointed him treasurer of the kingdom.
In 1362, he was nominated to the bishoprics of London and
Ely, and having rejected the former, was consecrated to the
latter on March 20. In the following year, he was made
chancellor of England.
The Pope, having confirmed his translation to the see of
Canterbury, he received the pallium on November 4, 1366,
at St. Stephen's, Westminster, from the hands of the bishop
of Bath. Shortly afterwards he resigned the great seal in
order to devote himself exclusively to his ecclesiastical duties.
He undertook a visitation of his province, and exerted himself
to abolish pluralities. He also succeeded in settling a
dispute between the London clergy and their parishioners
1 Widm ore's Hist, of Westminster Abbey, p. 91.
242
Simon Langham
by fixing the rate of the tithe at a halfpenny in the pound.3
At the desire of the monks, he dismissed John Wyclif from the
wardenship of the college founded by his predecessor at Oxford,
and reinstated John Woodhall (vide Simon Islip). Two years
after his translation to the see of Canterbury Archbishop
Langham was residing at his favourite manor of Otford, when
he received a letter from Pope Urban V. informing him that
he was appointed cardinal-presbyter of St. Sixtus. King
Edward III., who was greatly offended on hearing of
Langham's elevation to the cardinalate, at once declared the
see of Canterbury vacant, and took possession of the tem-
poralities.3
Langham was forced to borrow money in order to pay for
his journey to Avignon. He left England in February, 1369,
and was received with much honour by the pope. Friendly
relations were soon re-established between Langham and
King Edward III., who realized the advantage of having
so distinguished a friend at the papal court. Langham was
permitted to retain certain preferments which he held in
England, including the deanery of Lincoln, the archdeaconry
and treasurership of Wells, and a prebend at York, the revenues
of which amounted to 1,000 pounds yearly.
After the death of Urban V., Langham became the trusted
friend and counsellor of Pope Gregory XL, who made him
cardinal-bishop of Praeneste.4 In 1371, he was appointed
along with the French Cardinal De Beauvais to mediate a
peace between the kings of France and England. The
embassy proved a failure, and Langham is said to have
offended the pope by removing his cap in the presence of the
king of England and, as a cardinal of the Roman Church,
showing undue deference to his old master. Before leaving
England Langham visited Canterbury and, with his customary
generosity, presented a gold piece to each of the monks. So
popular did he make himself, that on the death of
Archbishop Whittlesey (q. v.) the chapter of Canterbury
re-nominated him to the archbishopric,5 but Edward III.
in great indignation nullified the election.
2 Ibid., p. 94. J Anglia Sacra, I., 47.
l Ed. Foss, The Judges of England, VoL III., p. 554.
s Le Neve, Fasti Ecclesice Anglicance, I., 19.
243
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
When in the year 1375, arrangements were in progress for
the removal of the papal court from Avignon to Rome,
Langham, who earnestly desired to end his days in his old
monastery at Westminster, begged leave from King Edward
to return to England. This was granted to him, and he was
preparing to set out for his native country when he died
suddenly at Avignon from a stroke of paralysis on July 22,
1376. He was buried in the Carthusian monastery at
Avignon, but three years later his remains were removed
to Westminster Cathedral, and buried in St. Benet's chapel.
His benefactions to Westminster are said to have amounted
altogether to 10,000 pounds, a sum equivalent to twenty
times as much at the present day.
244
55— WILLIAM WHITTLESEY, 1368 to 1374.
King of England : Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
On the resignation of Simon Langham (q. v.) the government
decided to fill his place by a discreet man of moderate capacity,
who would abstain from taking part in politics. Such
was William Whittlesey, Bishop of Worcester, who was
accordingly nominated by the king, and elected by the chapter
of Canterbury. His election was confirmed by a papal bull
dated October 11, 1368.
Of Whittlesey's early life little is known. He is believed
to have been born at the village of Whittlesea, in Cambridge-
shire, whence he derived his surname. He owed his education
and ecclesiastical preferments entirely to his uncle, Archbishop
Simon Islip (q. v.). According to some accounts he studied
at both Oxford and Cambridge, and, in 1349, was made
" custos " of Peterhouse at the latter university. Among
the preferments bestowed on him were the archdeaconry of
Huntingdon, prebends at Lichfield, Chichester, Lincoln and
Hastings, and the rectories of Croydon, and Cliff e near
Rochester.1
About the year 1315, he was sent by the king on a mission
to the papal court at Avignon, and shortly after his return
was made dean of the Court of Arches by his uncle. Arch-
bishop Islip, who was now in failing health, appointed
Whittlesey his vicar-general, and in 1360, managed to secure
his election to the see of Rochester. As the archbishop was
too ill to proceed to Canterbury, he consecrated his nephew
in the private chapel of his manor at Otford. Two years
later, Whittlesey was translated through his uncle's influence
to the see of Worcester.
Archbishop Whittlesey's enthronement at Canterbury on
June 17, 1369, took place privately, owing to a renewed out-
break of the plague. At the time of his elevation to the
* Anglia Sacra, I., 535.
245
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
primacy he was well advanced in years, and soon became
a confirmed invalid. The bishops of London, Worcester, and
St. David's, received his authority to act for him by proxy.
He lived chiefly at Otford, which had been the favourite
residence of his uncle.
Owing to the prolonged wars of King Edward III., the
nation was deeply in debt. The once valiant monarch had
sunk into premature old age, and was much under the in-
influence of evil counsellors. Heavy taxes were imposed
on the clergy to meet the needs of the crown. When in
1373, another subsidy was demanded from all the beneficed
clergy, Archbishop Whittlesey determined, ill as he was, to
proceed to London to protest against the injustice. It was
arranged that he should open the proceedings of the December
Convocation by preaching in St. Paul's.
The old archbishop ascended the pulpit with difficulty and
chose as his text "The truth shall make you free." He
preached in Latin, but had scarcely introduced his subject
when faintness overtook him, and he sank down insensible.
He was carried from the cathedral and conveyed in his barge
to Lambeth, whence he was never able to be removed.8
There he died on June 6, 1374, and was buried in Canterbury
Cathedral, near his uncle's tomb. By his will he directed
that his executors should spend what they thought desirable
out of his estate for the repose of his soul, a commission
which must have involved them in some perplexity. His
library he bequeathed to Peterhouse, Cambridge, and the
remainder of his estate to his poor relatives.3
1 Wilkins' Concilia, III., 97.
3 Cf. Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, IV., 221.
246
56.— SIMON SUDBURY, 1375 to 1381.
Kings of England : Edward III., 1327 to 1377.
Richard II., 1377 to 1399.
As already related, the chapter of Canterbury desired nothing
better than to reappoint Cardinal Simon Langham (q. v.)
to the archbishopric, on the death of Archbishop Whittlesey.
The election of the cardinal was, however, nullified by both
the king and the pope. Simon Sudbury, Bishop of London,
appears to have owed his nomination to the party of John of
Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, to which he was attached.
Simon was the son of Nigel and Sarah Theobald, and was
born at Sudbury in Suffolk. His parents appear to have
occupied a good position, and possessed sufficient means to give
their son an excellent education. After completing his
studies at the University of Paris, where he took the degree
of doctor of canon law, Simon attached himself to the papal
service, and was made chaplain to Pope Innocent VI., and
auditor of the papal palace at Avignon. In 1357, the pope
employed him on an embassy to England, and shortly after-
wards he was made chancellor of Salisbury Cathedral. In
March, 1362, he was consecrated to the see of London,
to which he had been appointed by a papal provision.
His skill as a statesman caused him to be frequently employed
by Edward III. on embassies to foreign powers, and he
continued to act in this capacity after he became archbishop.1
A story is told of him which shows that he held opinions some-
what in advance of his age. One day in the year 1370,
at the time of a jubilee of St. Thomas of Canterbury,
Sudbury met a crowd of pilgrims on their way to the
famous shrine. The bishop sternly warned them that the
plenary indulgences which they would obtain by their
pilgrimage could avail them nothing without true repentance
and amendment of life. His words caused much offence,
• Ed. Foss., The Judges of England, Vol. III., 98.
247
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and an old knight, Sir Thomas of Aldon in Kent, said
angrily : " Wherefore, Lord Bishop, do you stir up the
people against St. Thomas ? I foretell that you yourself will
end your days by a death of shame."2
Sudbury's elevation to the primacy took place in May, 1375.
Two months later, he accompanied the Duke of Lancaster
and his suite to Bruges to attend a conference with the papal
legate, at which the pope's claim to arrears of tribute from
England was discussed. John Wyclif, the famous reformer,
also accompanied the duke to this conference. While in
Flanders, Sudbury received the pallium, and after his return
to England was enthroned at Canterbury.
After the death of the Black Prince, on June 8, 1376, the
power of Lancaster and his party increased. William of
Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester, who had been a trusted
counsellor of the king and the Black Prince, was dismissed
from office and impeached. When convocation met in
February 1377, Archbishop Sudbury purposely omitted to send
Wykeham a summons. This omission was deeply resented
by the other clergy, and William Courtenay, Bishop of London,
announced that the king would obtain no subsidy from the
clergy until Wykeham was summoned to take his place among
them. The archbishop, acting on instructions received
from Lancaster, at first refused to give way, but was ultimately
forced to send a summons to the bishop of Winchester.
King Edward III. died on June 11, 1377, and on July 16,
Archbishop Sudbury crowned Richard II., then aged twelve.
In the spring of 1377, bulls arrived from Pope Gregory XL,
addressed to the archbishop of Canterbury, to the bishop of
London, and to the university of Oxford, demanding that
enquiry should at once be made into the erroneous doctrines
taught by John Wyclif, rector of Lutterworth, and severely
censuring the English clergy for their lukewarmness in the
matter. Sudbury and Courtenay then instituted a com-
mission of enquiry to sit at Oxford, and Wyclif was summoned
to appear at Lambeth Palace. The trial at Lambeth had
scarcely commenced, however, when a message was received
from the Princess of Wales forbidding the judges to proceed
with the case. The citizens of London had meantime
2 Anglia Sacra, I., 49.
248
Simon Sudbury
assembled to defend Wyclif , and forced their way into Lambeth
chapel. The reformer was dismissed with the admonition
that he should refrain from spreading his heretical doctrines.
In June, 1380, Sudbury was appointed to succeed Richard
Scrope as chancellor of England. While acting in this capacity
he appears to have been held responsible for the third levy of
the obnoxious poll-tax, in 1381. Discontent prevailed widely
among the poorer classes in the eastern counties of England,
and was much increased by the harangues of a Kentish priest
named John Ball, who preached the equality of all men.
Ball was thrice imprisoned by order of Archbishop Sudbury.
When, in June, an army of nearly 100,000 ragged and des-
perate peasants marched to London under the leadership of
Wat Tyler, the archbishop and other ministers took refuge
in the Tower along with the young king and his mother.
On their way, the mob had stopped at Canterbury, and
pillaged the archbishop's palace. They also broke into the
prison at Maidstone, and released John Ball, who marched
with them to London.
To appease the angry peasants, the king's advisers caused it
to be known that the archbishop had resigned the chancellor-
ship. He, however, joined with Robert de Hales, the treasurer,
in advising the young king not to meet the rebels, whom he
described as bare-legged ruffians. This so enraged them that
they swore to have his head.
Early on the morning of June 14, the mob appeared before
the Tower, and demanded access to the king. A message was
sent that he would meet them at Mile End. Before setting
out with his followers, he heard mass in the chapel of the
Tower, Archbishop Sudbury officiating. After the departure
of the king and his suite, the archbishop, who fully realized
his danger, remained in the chapel engaged in prayer. The
greater number of the peasants had flocked to Mile End to
meet the king, but a detachment now broke into the Tower.
" Rushing hither and thither," says an old chronicle, " they
sought the archbishop with terrible noise and fury. At length,
finding one of his servants, they charged him to bring them to
his master, whom they named traitor. The servant, daring
none other, brought them to the chapel where the archbishop
was still engaged in prayer, not unknowing of their coming
249
17
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and purpose. ' You have come right, my sons,' said he, as he
saw them enter. ' Here am I, your archbishop, neither a
traitor nor a spoiler.' " They dragged him to Tower Hill,
and prepared to execute him. After solemnly warning them
that his death would bring an interdict on the whole country,
he declared that he forgave his murderers and calmly sub-
mitted to his fate. No executioner who knew his business
could be found, and so barbarously was the act performed, that
not until after eight strokes of the sword was the arch-
bishop's head severed from his body.3 The head, after being
paraded through the streets of London, was stuck on London
Bridge. Six days later, when the insurrection had been
quelled, the head and body were conveyed to Canterbury, and
buried in the cathedral on the south side of the altar of
St. Dunstan, where a monument was erected, which still
exists. Miracles are said to have been wrought at the tomb
of the murdered prelate. A slab of marble was also placed to
his memory in the church of St. Gregory, in his native town
of Sudbury.
While bishop of London, he had been a great benefactor
to Sudbury, of which the parish church was purchased by him
and his brother John. He rebuilt the west end of the church,
and founded a college for secular priests on the site of his
father's house. During his primacy, he caused the West
Gate of Canterbury to be erected, and spent large sums on the
reparation of the cathedral.4 But his work there was inter-
rupted by his violent death.
3 Stow's Annals, p. 287.
4 Anglia Sacra, I. 49.,
250
57— WILLIAM COURTENAY, 1381 to 1396.
King of England : Richard II., 1377 to 1399.
William Courtenay, who was elected to the see of Canterbury
a few weeks after the murder of Sudbury, was the fourth son
of Hugh Courtenay, Earl of Devon, and Margaret Bohun,
daughter of Humphrey Bohun, Earl of Hereford, by his wife
Elizabeth, a daughter of Edward I. William was born in
Exeter about the year 1342. After a course of study at
Stapleton Hall, Oxford, where he took the degree of doctor
of law, he was appointed chancellor of the university. Pre-
bends at Exeter, Wells and York were also conferred on him,
and in 1369, when only in his twenty-eighth year, he was made
bishop of Hereford.
On the elevation of Bishop Sudbury to the primacy.
Courtenay was translated to the see of London in 1375. He
had previously attached himself to the party of the Black
Prince and Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester, and seems to
have been genuinely desirous of upholding the rights of the
national Church against royal or papal oppression. In 1373,
he supported the clergy when they complained of their
inability to grant the king a subsidy while burdened by papal
taxation. Soon after his appointment to the see of London,
he was chosen by the " Good Parliament," as one of the
committee appointed to advise King Edward III. Pope
Gregory XL had issued a bull against the Florentines who
had endeavoured to dissuade the Romans from receiving
him. To the great delight of the Londoners, who were jealous
of the foreigners, Courtenay caused this bull to be published
at St. Paul's Cross. The houses of the excommunicated
Florentines, many of whom were wealthy merchants, were
at once plundered by the Londoners. Courtenay was
summoned before the Court of Chancery to answer for these
illegal proceedings, and to withdraw certain statements which
he had made at St. Paul's Cross. With some difficulty he
251
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
received permission to do this by proxy. One of his officials
mounted a pulpit, and declared that the bishop's words had
been misunderstood.1
In 1378, when Pope Urban VI. was forced to create twenty-
six new cardinals in one day to take the place of those who
had deserted him for the antipope, he is said to have nomin-
ated Courtenay among them. But the bishop respectfully
declined the honour, which the position of Urban rendered
specially precarious.
In February 1377, Courtenay summoned John Wyclif to
appear in St. Paul's Cathedral to answer for his heretical
doctrines. This summons seriously offended the Duke
of Lancaster, whose defence of Wyclif seems to have
been undertaken chiefly for party motives. Wyclif arrived,
attended by the Duke of Lancaster, Lord Percy the
Earl Marshal, and a band of armed followers. They made
their way with difficulty to the Lady Chapel through the
crowd of people who thronged the church. The Earl Marshal
ordered his followers to force a way for him through the crowd,
and for this was severely reproved by Courtenay. After they
had assembled in the Lady Chapel angry words passed between
Courtenay and Lancaster, who declared that he would drag
the bishop out of the cathedral by the hair sooner than
endure his insolence. The Londoners, who hated the duke,
prepared to defend their bishop and the meeting broke up
in confusion.2
In 1382, after the elevation of Courtenay to the primacy,
the parliament declared that Wyclif's teaching was disturbing
the peace of the realm, and the archbishop was again called
upon to take measures against the reformer. Courtenay
convened a provincial synod at the monastery of the
Black Friars, in London. The proceedings were interrupted
by an earthquake, which was supposed to betoken the divine
wrath against Wyclif's heresy. His doctrine concerning
the Holy Eucharist, and certain conclusions drawn from
his writings, were condemned. Wyclif was banished from
Oxford, but was allowed to retire to his rectory at
Lutterworth. Courtenay continued to take active measures
1 Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, IV., 316.
2 Fasciculi Zizaniorum (Rolls series), p. 272.
252
William Courtenay
against the Lollards, as Wyclif's followers were called.
Dr. Rygge, the chancellor of Oxford, who favoured the
reformer's doctrine, was summoned to appear before the
archbishop, and publicly abjured his opinions.3 Courtenay
placed the town of Leicester under an interdict, until certain
Lollards, who had taken refuge there, had been delivered up.4
In August, 1381, Archbishop Courtenay was made
chancellor of England, and in the following November,
opened parliament by a speech delivered in English. He
resigned the Great Seal after holding it only a few months.
In 1382, he commenced a systematic and conscientious
visitation of his province. Having passed without opposition
through Rochester, Chichester, Bath and Worcester, he
reached Exeter. There the bishop, Thomas of Brentingham,
opposed his proceedings, and was immediately suspended.
The bishop appealed to Rome, upon which Courtenay ex-
communicated him, and all who had supported him. While
the dispute was in progress, certain of the bishop of Exeter's
followers met a servant of the archbishop on his way to deliver
a citation to their master to appear before the metropolitan.
They seized the document, and forced the servant to eat it,
seals, wax and all. The king, on hearing of this act of
violence, refused to support the bishop of Exeter, who was
consequently forced to make his submission to the archbishop
and to withdraw his suit at Rome.5 The bishop of Salisbury
was also excommunicated for opposing the visitation of his
diocese.
Courtenay deeply regretted King Richard's extravagance
and senseless oppression of his people. More than once he
ventured to remonstrate, though to little purpose. On one
occasion the archbishop was requested by the lords to reprove
Richard for his evil conduct. The only result was to rouse
the king to furious anger, and he would have undoubtedly
struck the archbishop had he not been restrained by his
uncle, Thomas of Woodstock. Adam of Usk states that
Courtenay fled from London, disguised as a friar, and took
refuge in his ancestral estates in Devonshire until the king's
3 Ibid,, p. 298. 4 Wilkins' Concilia, III., 157 to 158.
s Ibid., p. 183.
253
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
wrath had subsided.6 Towards the close of his life, the
primate attempted to act as mediator between the king
and the adherents of his cousin, Henry of Lancaster.
Archbishop Courtenay died at Maidstone, in Kent, on July 31,
1396. He had left directions that he should be buried at
Maidstone, but his body was conveyed with great pomp to
Canterbury and buried in the cathedral near the tomb of
the Black Prince, the king and many of the nobles being
present at the funeral.
Courtenay was a generous benefactor to the Church. He
caused the hospital built by Archbishop Boniface at Maid-
stone to be pulled down, and a college for secular priests
erected on the same site. At Meopham, he repaired the
parish church, and caused almshouses to be erected. On
the repairs of Christ Church, Canterbury, he spent 1,000
marks, and presented to the cathedral many ornaments of
great value besides a number of books.
6 Thomas of Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II., 128; Chronicle of
Adam of Usk (Royal Soc.) p. 150.
254
58.— THOMAS ARUNDEL, 1397 to 1414.
Kings of England : Richard II., 1377 to J399-
Henry IV., 1399 to 141 3.
Henry V., 141 3 to 1422.
By a papal bull dated September 25, 1396, Thomas Arundel,
Archbishop of York, was presented to the see of Canterbury
with the approval of the king. The primate-elect was
the third son of Richard Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel, by
Eleanor, his second wife, the fifth daughter of Henry
Plantagenet, third Earl of Lancaster. The Fitzalans were
descended from a Norman family, whose ancestors had come
to England in the time of the Conqueror. Thomas was born
about the year 1352, and was educated for the Church at
Oxford. The influence of the Arundel family, to whom King
Richard II. was frequently under pecuniary obligations,
secured for him preferments at an early age. When scarcely
twenty, he was made archdeacon of Taunton, and in the follow-
ing year was consecrated bishop of Ely.
In 1386, after the dismissal of Michael de la Pole, Earl of
Suffolk, from the chancellorship, the Great Seal was entrusted
to the youthful bishop of Ely.1 On his appointment he
received a patent from the king, granting him the manors
of Hackney and Leyton near London, " forasmuch as he
had no domains or villas belonging to his bishopric, where his
household and horses could be entertained, while he was in
the office of chancellor." The manor of Stebenhyth was also
assigned to him at a later period.
Arundel seems to have attached himself to the party
founded by the Duke of Gloucester, the king's uncle. His
brother Richard, who had succeeded to the earldom of
Arundel in 1376, was one of the eleven lords appointed to act
as a council of regency. Many of the acts of this council
were resented by the king, but certain of the nobles rose in arms,
1 Eulogium, Hayden's edition, III., 360.
255
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and Richard was forced to submit himself to the party whom
he distrusted. Five of his favourite counsellors were im-
peached, among them Alexander Neville, Archbishop of York.
The immediate result of Neville's deprivation was the transla-
tion of Thomas Arundel to the archbishopric of York in
April, 1388. Soon after this, he resigned the chancellorship,
but was re-appointed ini3o,i,2 and during the next five years
took a prominent part in political affairs.
Arundel was the first English prelate to be translated from
one metropolitan see to another. On February 10, 1397,
he received the pallium as archbishop of Canterbury,
from the hands of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester. One
of Arundel's first acts on his elevation to Canterbury was
to resign the Great Seal. He then commenced a visitation
of his diocese, which he carried out in a thorough manner,
visiting every church, either in person or through his com-
missioners. The suffragans were in all cases forced to submit
to his reforms.
Soon after Arundel's appointment to the see of Canterbury
his troubles began. He appears to have been suspected of con-
spiracy, with the Duke of Gloucester, the Earl of Warwick, and
his brother, the Earl of Arundel, against the king. There is no
real evidence, however, that such a conspiracy ever existed.
In 1389, the king, who was then nearly twenty-three, had
insisted on dismissing the council of regency and taking the
government into his own hands. For the next eight years
he ruled wisely, but many writers suppose that he never
abandoned the secret intention of taking revenge, when
opportunity arose, on those who had injured him during his
minority.
On July 10, 1397, Richard invited the Duke of Gloucester
and the Earls of Arundel and Warwick to dine with him.
Warwick alone dared to obey the summons, and after the
banquet was arrested by the king's orders. Richard then
marched to Essex, with an armed force, and arrested his uncle
the Duke of Gloucester, who was sent to imprisonment at
Calais, and soon afterwards murdered.
The king gave his oath to Archbishop Arundel that if he
would invite his brother Richard to a meeting in London, the
2 Edward Foss, The Judges of England, III., 145.
256
Thomas Arundel
earl would be permitted to depart unharmed. The primate,
trusting the king's word, invited Richard to visit him at
Lambeth. The two brothers afterwards crossed in a barge
to Westminster, and Earl Richard was admitted to the king's
presence. Thomas waited till nightfall, but his brother did
not return. He was then rowed back to Lambeth.3 The
brothers never met again. The earl was soon afterwards
condemned for treason, and executed on Tower Hill.
On September 30, 1397, the House of Commons, at the king's
instigation, impeached Archbishop Arundel for high treason.
The principal charge against him was that while holding the
office of chancellor, eleven years previously, he had consented
to restrict the royal authority, by placing it in the hands of
the council of regency. This fact he could not deny. He
was not permitted to defend himself, but was privately
assured by the king that he would soon be reinstated in
the royal favour.4 He was sentenced to exile, and was
allowed six weeks to prepare for his departure from England.
All his property was confiscated, and Roger Walden, Dean of
York, was appointed to the see of Canterbury, by the
king's orders.5
Arundel set out for Rome, where he was well received by
Pope Boniface IX. The pope appointed him bishop of
St. Andrews in Scotland — an empty title, for at that time
Scotland adhered to the antipope.
Soon after Arundel's arrival in Rome, letters reached the
pope from King Richard II., in which many charges were
made against the archbishop. This determined the pope to
refrain from supporting him further, and he retired to Florence.
While there he entered into correspondence with Henry of
Lancaster.
The archbishop was joined by his nephew and namesake,
Thomas, Earl of Arundel, who was determined to avenge
his father's death. In 1399, Arundel and his nephew joined
Henry of Lancaster, with whom they crossed to England, and
were present at the siege of Bristol. The archbishop is said
to have had an interview with King Richard in Wales, and
3 Eulogium, p. 376. 4 Ibid., p. 376.
s Thomas of Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, Vol., II. p. 224.
257
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to have consoled him by promising that his life should be
spared.
Arundel was present in Westminster Hall when Richard
was made to read a proclamation resigning the crown and
declaring himself unfit to reign. The archbishop then took
Henry by the hand, and led him to the vacant throne.
After Henry had taken his seat thereon, and been proclaimed
king, the archbishop preached an eloquent sermon, from the
text, " Vir dominabitur in populo."6 On October 13, 1399,
he crowned Henry king of England.
Immediately after his return to England, Arundel had been
reinstated in his offices of archbishop and chancellor — Roger
Walden being regarded as a usurper. After holding the seal
for ten days, he resigned it, probably from motives of policy.
He was again appointed chancellor in 1407, and for the fifth
time, in 1412.
During the remainder of his life, Arundel was distinguished
chiefly for his zeal against the Lollards. In the second year
of King Henry's reign, the statute " De haeretico com-
burendo," for the burning of heretics, was passed. William
Sautre, a parish priest at Lynn, was the first Englishman to be
burned for heresy. He was condemned for the denial of tran-
substantiation, and burnt in 1401. Nine years later, John
Badby, a tailor of Evesham, was burned as a heretic in the
presence of the Prince of Wales, the archbishop of Canterbury,
and many nobles and prelates. The groans of the sufferer
in his last agony were taken by the compassionate prince as a
recantation, and he ordered the faggots to be pulled away.
But the offer of life and a pension failed to move the dauntless
Lollard. The cruel flames were rekindled, and so Badby
perished.7
In the reign of Henry V., Sir John Oldcastle (Lord Cobham),
who had served with distinction in the French wars, and been
an intimate friend of the king's youth, was arrested on a
charge of favouring the Lollards. Many of the persecuted
preachers had been sheltered by him in his strong castle, of
Cowley, near Rochester. He was condemned to death, but
escaped from the Tower, where he had been confined. Three
6 Ibid., p. 237.
» Dean Spence, History of the Church of England, Vol. II., p. 332.
258
Thomas Arundel
years later — in 141 8 — he was again arrested, and burnt as a
heretic.
In 1405, when it was proposed in parliament that the
revenues of the clergy should be seized to supply the royal
necessities, Arundel strenuously upheld the rights of the
Church. The king, fearful of offending the clergy, supported
the archbishop, and the project was abandoned.
Archbishop Arundel was one of the few who remained
faithful to Henry IV. to the last. He died at his rectory of
Hackington on February 19, 1414, of an inflammation in the
throat. For some days before his death he was unable to
take any nourishment. The Lollards declared it to be a
judgment of God that he who had deprived the people of
food for the soul should himself suffer for lack of food for the
body. He was buried in Canterbury Cathedral.
While bishop of Ely, Arundel rebuilt the episcopal palace
belonging to that see at Holborn. While archbishop of York,
he spent a large sum in repairing the cathedral, to which he
also presented many valuable ornaments. To Canterbury
he was equally liberal, and among other gifts presented to the
cathedral a peal of five bells.8
8 The Judges of England, III. 150.
259
59— ROGER WALDEN, 1398 to 1399.
King of England : Richard II., 1377 to 1399.
During the exile of Archbishop Arundel, Roger Walden, Dean
of York, and Lord High Treasurer of England, was promoted
to the see of Canterbury. Roger was a native of Saffron
Walden in Essex, and is said by Adam of Usk to have been
the son of a butcher. Of his early life nothing is known. In
1371, he was appointed to the benefice of St. Helier's
in Jersey, and appears to have lived for some years in the
Channel Islands, where he held some civil office.
Through the patronage of Hugh, Lord Percy, he was
presented to the living of Kirkby Overblow, in Yorkshire,
in 1374, but it is improbable that he ever resided there.
From this time he was a considerable pluralist, though certain
writers declare that up to the date of his consecration to the
see of Canterbury he remained a layman.1 Among the livings
held by him at different times were those of Fenny Drayton,
near Market Harborough, in Leicestershire, Fordham near
Colchester, and the rectory of St. Andrew's, Holborn. He was
also appointed archdeacon of Winchester, dean of York, and
held prebends in the cathedrals of London, Exeter, Lincoln,
Salisbury and York.
Walden was apparently high in the royal favour, for the king
appointed him captain of Marcke, near Calais, which post he
held until 1391. He was one of the commissioners chosen to
negotiate a truce with the court of Flanders and certain
Flemish towns.2 He was also made high bailiff of Guisnes
and treasurer of Calais, in which capacity he joined in a raid
into French territory. About the year 1393, he was recalled
to England, and made keeper of the castle of Porchester and
secretary to King Richard II.
In 1395, Walden was appointed Lord High Treasurer of
Haydon's Eulogium (Rolls series), Vol. III., p. 377.
* Hook, Lives of the Archbishops, Vol. III., p. 529.
260
Roger Walden
England. Immediately after the deposition of Arundel (q. v.),
King Richard wrote to the pope, petitioning him to promote
Roger Walden, described as a layman, to the see of Canterbury.
On receipt of a bull from the pope, who according to one account
believed Arundel to be dead, the king caused Walden to be
consecrated by Robert Braybrook, Bishop of London. The
ceremony took place on February 3, 1398.3 Walden's
enthronement at Canterbury was conducted on a scale of great
magnificence, the king himself being present.
On the occasion of the combat arranged to be held at
Coventry between the Duke of Norfolk and Henry of
Lancaster, in 1398, Richard arrived at the lists accompanied
by many nobles and by Roger Walden, Archbishop of Canter-
bury.4 As the duel was about to begin, the king put a stop
to it, without giving any reason for doing so.
In the same year Richard is recorded to have visited the
shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury, under a strong body-
guard of the men of Chester. The archbishop hospitably
entertained the king and his escort, and afterwards returned
with him to London. On their arrival, " they took all the
jewels out of the Tower, with the stone bottle given by the
Virgin to St. Thomas of Canterbury."
Walden is said to have been warned by a northern hermit
to vacate the archbishopric, and to advise the king to restore
the possessions of the disinherited lords. He refused to
interfere, and advised the hermit to address himself to the
king personally.5
No record has been preserved of Walden's ecclesiastical
acts, his register having been destroyed after the return of
Arundel, but he is said to have promulgated certain con-
stitutions. On the return of Arundel to England, Walden
hastened to secure all the property of the see of Canterbury.
The plate, furniture, jewels and other valuables, he caused to
be conveyed to Saltwood Castle. They were seized, however,
by order of Henry of Lancaster, placed in six carts, and
restored to Arundel, who was reinstated in his see.
3 Stubbs' Reg. Sac. Ang., p. 61.
* Chronique de la Traison et Mort de Ric. II. (Eng. Hist. Soc), p. 153.
s Eulogium, p. 380.
261
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Walden was placed under arrest, but at the request of Arch-
bishop Arundel his life was spared. He had a step-mother
living near the priory of St. Bartholomew, where he had
built a chapel. The people of the new king left to mother
and son neither robe nor plate, but cleared the house of every-
thing it contained. The deposed primate then retired into
obscurity, but in the following year was suspected of being
concerned in a plot to dethrone Henry IV. He was, however,
acquitted and set at liberty. According to some accounts
he lived in great poverty for the next four years. In 1403,
he is recorded to have received two barrels of wine from the
king. Arundel appears to have treated him with the greatest
consideration, and recommended him to the favour of the
pope and of King Henry IV.
When the bishopric of London became vacant, the king
agreed with some reluctance to appoint Walden, at Arundel's
request. He was consecrated at Lambeth on June 29, 1405,
and in the following year was installed in St. Paul's Cathedral
by Thomas Chillenden, Prior of Christ Church, Canterbury.
After the ceremony, the canons walked in procession along
the close, wearing garlands of red roses.
Walden did not live long to enjoy his new dignity. He
died at his country palace of Much Hadham, in Hertfordshire,
on January 6, 1406. His body was conveyed to the chapel
which he had built in the priory church of St. Bartholomew,
Smithfield, where it lay for some days. It was then removed,
and buried in St. Paul's. Bishop Clifford, of Worcester, was
present at the funeral, together with John Prophete, the
keeper of the privy seal, and many others. Before the burial
Prophete lifted the veil, and they gazed on the face of the
dead bishop "which was fairer than wont, and looked like
that of a man in a sleep."6
Archbishop Arundel gave orders for masses to be sung
for the pious prelate, " not haughty in prosperity, patient in
adversity." His character is praised by all contemporary
writers. A General History, from the creation of the world, has
been attributed to him, but is evidently of earlier date.
6 Wylie's Hist, of Eng. under Henry IV., Vol^III. p. 123.
262
6o.— HENRY CHICHELE, 1414 to 1443.
Kings of England : Henry V., 141 3 to 1422.
Henry VI., 1422 to 1461.
Less than a fortnight after the death of Archbishop Arundel
the king nominated to the see of Canterbury Henry Chichele,
Bishop of St. David's, a distinguished statesman, who had
rendered many services to the crown. Henry was born at
Higham Ferrars in Northamptonshire, about the year 1362.
He was the son of a yeoman named Thomas Chichele, who had
been at one time a draper, by his wife, Agnes, daughter of
William Pyncheon, a gentleman entitled to bear arms.
There is a story that William of Wykeham, the celebrated
bishop of Winchester, who at one period of his life had been
archdeacon of Northampton, was on a visit to the castle
in the neighbourhood of Higham Ferrars, when he met and
conversed with a shepherd boy. The bishop was so pleased
with the lad's intelligence that after causing enquiries to be
made concerning his parentage, he resolved to educate him.
The boy was Henry Chichele, who was indebted to the bishop
of Winchester for his education at the two great foundations
of that prelate, Winchester College, and New College, Oxford.1
In 1389, Chichele completed his studies at Oxford as
bachelor of Civil Law, and afterwards took the degree of
doctor. His skill as a lawyer soon attracted attention, and in
1396 he became an advocate in the Court of Arches. In the
same year he took holy orders, and was presented to the
rectory of St. Stephen's, Walbrook, by the prior and convent
of St. John's, Colchester. About this period, he obtained the
patronage of Richard Metford, Bishop of Salisbury, through
whose influence he was appointed archdeacon of Dorset, with
prebends in the churches of Salisbury, Abergwilly, and
Lichfield. In 1402, he was made archdeacon of Salisbury and
canon of Lincoln, and in 1404, chancellor of Salisbury with a
1 Arthur Duck, Life of Henry Chichele, 1699.
263
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
living at Odiham in Hants. Other minor preferments were
also lavished on him.
Chichele was first employed on state business in 1405, when,
in company with Sir John Cheyne, he was sent on an embassy
to Pope Innocent VII. From this time he was repeatedly
employed on important embassies to France and Italy during
the next thirty years. In 1407, while Chichele was employed
as an ambassador to the papal court then at Siena, news
reached him of the death of the bishop of St. David's. Chichele
had obtained from the king the promise of this see, to which
he was consecrated by the pope himself on June 17, 1408.
In the following year, he was chosen to accompany Bishop
Robert Hallam, of Salisbury, to the famous council of Pisa,
at which the two rival popes were deposed and Alexander V.
elected. The only result of this council was that there were
now three popes instead of two, for Gregory XII. and
Benedict XIII. both refused to submit to the decree of their
rebellious cardinals.
Immediately after the accession of Henry V., Chichele was
employed on another embassy to France. He conducted the
business entrusted to him with so much wisdom and sound
judgment that he won the life-long confidence of the warrior-
king to whose influence his nomination to the see of Canter-
bury was due. He received the temporalities of the arch-
bishopric on May 30, 1414, and the pallium on July 24, at
the hands of the bishops of Winchester and Norwich.2
The royal counsellors, with whom the archbishop was in
complete agreement, decided that the best means of diminish-
ing the general discontent which prevailed throughout England
would be to prosecute the war with France. They were
also of the opinion that it would be well to employ the
restless disposition of the young king on some difficult enter-
prise, and Henry V. was therefore encouraged to revive the
old claim of Edward III. to the crown of France. Archbishop
Chichele obtained from the clergy a grant of two tenths for
the war, and further replenished the state coffers by selling
certain lands belonging to alien priories.
During the king's absence abroad, Chichele was appointed
a member of the council chosen to assist the Duke of Bedford
2 Ibid., p. 40.
264
Henry Chichele
in the government of the kingdom. He ordered all the clergy
of Kent to bear arms lest the French should make a descent on
the coast.3 On Henry's return to England after the brilliant
victory of Agincourt the archbishop officiated at the thanks,
giving services held at St. Paul's, Westminster, and Canterbury
Cathedral. Chichele showed great energy in holding eccle-
siastical synods, and in the visitation of his diocese. The
statutes against heretics were enforced by him with the utmost
vigour, and during his primacy a number of Lollards were
condemned and burnt.4
During the campaign of 1418 the archbishop joined
Henry V. in France, and was present at the siege and
surrender of Rouen. He afterwards drew up the treaty made
between Henry and the citizens of the conquered town. On
February 26, 1421, he officiated at the coronation of the
queen at Westminster.
As long as the warrior-king lived he supported the Church
of England against papal encroachments. Chichele took
advantage of the schism to annul all the papal immunities
which had been secured within his province. By the Council
of Constance, at which the archbishop of Canterbury was
represented by proxy, the Great Schism was at length brought
to an end. Pope Martin V., who now took his seat on the
papal throne, was determined to assert his authority over the
English Church. He accordingly demanded that the Statutes
of Provisors and Praemunire (vide Simon Islip) should be
annulled, but to this the English Parliament refused to
consent.
Henry Beaufort, Bishop of Winchester, a legitimated son
of John of Gaunt, was at this period the most powerful church-
man in England, and the leader of a party opposed to the war.
To strengthen his position against the archbishop Pope
Martin V. proposed to make Beaufort a cardinal with the
authority of legate a latere for life. This proposal was strongly
opposed by Chichele, and Henry V. forbade Beaufort to accept
the appointment.
By the death of King Henry V., which occurred in August,
1422, Archbishop Chichele lost his most faithful friend and
supporter. The long minority of Henry VI. marks a period
3 Ibid., 69. < Wilkins' Concilia, III., passim.
265
18
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
of decay in Church and State. The pope now re-asserted
claims which the strong rule of Henry V. had kept in abey-
ance. In 1423, he went so far as to censure Archbishop
Chichele for having presumed, without the papal authority, to
grant an indulgence to all who in that year should make a
pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury.
In 1426, Beaufort accepted the cardinalate and the legatine
commission from the pope. To further humiliate the arch-
bishop, Martin V. demanded that he should obtain the repeal
of the statutes of Pro visors and Praemunire (vide Simon Islip).
Many wrathful letters passed between Chichele and the pope
who finally suspended the archbishop from the office of
legate which belonged to his see. Chichele appealed from
the pope to a future council, and was supported by the clergy
and many of the English nobles.
The threats of the pope seem to have at length overcome
the courage of the archbishop, who was now aged and feeble,
and he vainly implored the House of Commons to agree to the
papal demands. Chichele also attempted to mediate in the
quarrel between Cardinal Beaufort and the Duke of
Gloucester, but his efforts proved fruitless. After the death
of Pope Martin V., the conflict was continued between his
successor Eugenius IV. and Archbishop Chichele. John
Kemp, the Archbishop of York, was created a cardinal by the
pope, and insisted on taking precedence of Chichele on all
public occasions. Chichele appealed to Rome against the
pretensions of Kemp, but the case was decided against him
by the pope.
Archbishop Chichele was a generous benefactor to the
Church. At Lambeth he built the Water Tower, erroneously
called the Lollards' Tower, completed in 1435. At his native
village of Higham Ferrars he rebuilt the parish church, and
founded a college for priests. At Canterbury he founded the
cathedral library, furnishing it with a large collection of books,
and also spent a considerable sum in adorning the cathedral.
In 1435, he purchased land at Oxford on which he founded and
built at his own expense his college of " All Souls." This he
endowed with lands which he had purchased from the crown
to the value of 1,000 pounds. Chichele had reached his
eighty-first year when he went to Oxford to consecrate the
266
Henry Chichele
completed building. The aged primate was received with
great enthusiasm, all Oxford going out to meet him.
In April of the same year he wrote to Pope Eugenius IV.
begging permission to resign the archbishopric on account of
his infirmities.6 Almost immediately after the despatch of this
letter, his illness increased, and he died on 12 April, 1443, at
the age of eighty-one. He was buried in Canterbury
Cathedral^in a tomb which had been erected in his lifetime.
6 Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton (Rolls series), p. 145.
267
6i.— JOHN STAFFORD, 1443 to 1452.
King of England : Henry VI., 1422 to 1461.
In the letter addressed to the pope by Henry Chichele (q. v.)
two days before his death, the aged archbishop, after begging
permission to resign his office, concluded by asking that John,
Bishop of Bath and Wells, might be appointed as his successor.
" I can with a safe conscience," wrote Chichele, " recommend
as my successor in this holy see my very dear brother John,
Bishop of Bath and Wells, Chancellor of England. He is a
spiritual father whose appointment will be in every way
advantageous to the Church, if his varied excellence be taken
into account. His merits must be well-known to your
Holiness. If indeed, in addition to his high intellectual and
moral qualifications, the nobility of his birth, the influence
of his relations and his own almost boundless hospitality be
taken into consideration, I am persuaded that it would be
scarcely possible to select any one who in comparison with him
can be found fit for the important office."1
This letter was accompanied by another addressed to the
pope by Henry VI., in which the king commiserates the
archbishop's infirmities, and begs that an annual pension may
be allowed him out of the revenues of his see. The king
also begs the pope to provide for the see as the archbishop
had requested. Long before these letters reached Rome,
Chichele was dead, and no opposition was offered to the
translation of Stafford, either by the pope or by the chapter of
Canterbury. He was appointed on May 13, 1443.
John Stafford was probably an illegitimate2 son of Sir
Humphrey Stafford, of Southwick Court, North Bradley,
Wilts, by one Emma of North Bradley, who afterwards became
a nun in the priory of Holy Trinity at Canterbury. Emma
died in 1446, and was buried in North Bradley Church, a
1 Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton (Rolls series), L, 145 to 147
(Hook's translation).
2 Col. of Papal Letters, Vol. VII., p. 252.
268
John Stafford
handsome monument being erected to her by her son, the
archbishop.
The illegitimacy of Stafford's birth is disputed by Foss
and also by Dean Hook, who seems to have confused the
archbishop's father with his half-brother Sir Humphrey
Stafford "of the silver hand," Sheriff of Somerset and Dorset,
who was a legitimate son of Sir Humphrey of North Bradley
by his first wife.3
John Stafford was educated at Oxford, where he graduated
as doctor of civil law. On leaving the university he was made
dean of the Court of Arches, archdeacon of Salisbury, and
subsequently chancellor of the same diocese. In 1421, he
was made keeper of the privy seal, to which office he was
re-appointed on the accession of Henry VI., at a salary of
twenty shillings a day. In the following year, he was made
treasurer and dean of St. Martin's, London. In May, 1425,
he was consecrated bishop of Bath and Wells, of which see he
had been made dean two years previously. This preferment
he owed to the influence of Henry Beaufort, Bishop of
Winchester and Chancellor, to whose party he had attached
himself (vide Henry Chichele).
Beaufort was the representative of the papal interests in
England, and of the party opposed to the French war, and as
such was generally unpopular. In 1430, Stafford accom-
panied the young king to France. Soon after his return, he
was appointed chancellor in succession to John Kemp (q. v.)
who had succeeded Beaufort. Stafford was the first to bear
the title of Lord Chancellor, which he held uninterruptedly
for eighteen years.4
After his elevation to the see of Canterbury, Stafford con-
tinued to support the policy of Beaufort. On April 22, 1445,
he officiated at the marriage of Henry VI. with Margaret
of Anjou. To enable the king to pay the expenses of his
marriage and coronation the archbishop lent him 1,000 marks.
He cordially seconded the liberal intentions of the king at this
time, and is said to have induced the parliament of 1445 to
approve and confirm Henry's foundation of Eton College.
3 Cf. art. on John Stafford by C. L. Kingsford in Diet, of Nat. Biog.
1909.
« Anglia Sacra, I., 572.
269
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Though Stafford proved a better statesman than an arch-
bishop, his ecclesiastical duties were not altogether neglected.
Decrees which he published are extant forbidding the holding
of fairs and markets in cemeteries on Sundays. At a con-
vocation held in the second year of his primacy it was moved,
probably at the archbishop's suggestion, that an act of parlia-
ment should be obtained to prevent vexatious suits for the
purpose of bringing clerics into the king's courts, in contra-
vention of certain ecclesiastical rights and privileges.
By the death of Cardinal Beaufort, which occurred in 1447,
a few weeks after that of his rival the Duke of Gloucester,
Stafford lost his most powerful friend and patron. The
French war was now prosecuted to the bitter end, until
England had lost all her possessions in France except Calais.
Too late, the English government learned that to have followed
Beaufort's counsel of making peace while they might have done
so with honour would have been the better policy.
In 1450, the Duke of Suffolk, who after the death of
Gloucester had through the influence of Margaret of Anjou
become chief minister, was banished and murdered at sea.
Stafford, who for some reason that is not clear seems to have
lost favour at court, now resigned the chancellorship. At
the time of Jack Cade's rebellion, the archbishop is said to
have accompanied his kinsman the Duke of Buckingham to
Blackheath to confer with the rebels. The offer of a general
pardon to all the insurgents, except Cade himself, who would
lay down their arms, is said to have been made in the arch-
bishop's name,5 but this statement is of doubtful authority.
During Stafford's primacy, Reginald Pecock, a Welshman,
who was successively bishop of St. Asaph and of Chichester,
first attracted attention by his doctrines. Pecock was a deter-
mined adversary of the Lollards, and a vehement advocate
of the Roman supremacy. On the other hand, he bitterly
offended the mendicant orders by exposing the grave faults of
their system. He forwarded a statement of his doctrines
to Archbishop Stafford in a pamphlet known as " Abbreviato
Reginaldi Pecock," but no active measures were taken against
him until after Stafford's death.
The last public appearance of Archbishop Stafford was in
s Fabyan's Chronicle (ed. Ellis), p. 623.
270
John Stafford
August, 1451, when he received the king and queen, who had
come on a pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Thomas of Canter-
bury. He died at Maidstone on May 25, 1452, and was
buried in Canterbury Cathedral in the Martyrdom, under a
flat marble stone inlaid with brass.
271
62.— JOHN KEMP, 1452 to 1454.
King of England : Henry VI., 1422 to 1461.
At the time of Archbishop Stafford's death, the difficulties
of the English government were already great. The hatred
manifested towards Queen Margaret by a large section of the
people increased the insecurity of King Henry's position.
To choose an archbishop whom both sides could entirely trust
was a matter of no little difficulty. After prolonged dis-
cussion it was, at length, decided to translate to the see of
Canterbury Cardinal Kemp, Archbishop of York, an able and
distinguished statesman who had been attached to the peace
party of the late Cardinal Beaufort.
John Kemp was the second son of Thomas Kemp, a Kentish
landowner, by his wife Beatrice, daughter of Sir Thomas
Lewknor. He was born about the year 1380, at his father's
estate of Olanteigh in the parish of Wye, Kent. His elder
brother, Roger, was the father of Thomas Kemp, who became
bishop of London. John studied at Merton College, Oxford,
where he took his degree in canon law, and afterwards practised
in the ecclesiastical courts. He was one of the counsellors
called by Archbishop Thomas Arundel (q. v.) to assist in the
proceedings against Sir John Oldcastle for heresy in September,
1413.1 In the following year, having previously taken orders,
he was made dean of the Court of Arches, and vicar-general
to Archbishop Chichele. In 1416 he was admitted arch-
deacon of Durham. Other preferments followed in rapid
succession, and in 1419 he was consecrated bishop of Rochester.
As Kemp's family had no influence at court, it is evident that
he owed his preferments in Church and State to his own
worth.
His skill as a lawyer caused him to be frequently employed
on diplomatic missions by King Henry V., whom he accom-
panied to Normandy in 1415. Henry afterwards made him
1 Edward Foss, The Judges of England, IV., 334.
272
John Kemp
keeper of his privy seal and chancellor of the Duchy of
Normandy, an office which he held until the king's death in
1422. In February, 1421, he was translated from Rochester
to the see of Chichester, and in the following November was
translated thence to London by a provision of Pope Martin V.
On the accession of Henry VI., Kemp resigned the chancel-
lorship of Normandy, and was appointed a member of the
young king's council. He continued to be employed on
important diplomatic missions, and in 1426 succeeded
Cardinal Beaufort as chancellor of England. His appoint-
ment to the chancellorship took place on March 16, and on
April 8, he was elected archbishop of York. He retained the
great seal for the next six years, during which period he took
a prominent part in public affairs.2 Kemp was undoubtedly a
better statesman than an archbishop, and appears to have
been very unpopular in Yorkshire, which he seldom visited.
Among the tenants of Knaresborough Forest he roused bitter
enmity by quartering on them three hundred mercenaries
until they consented to pay him a disputed toll.
In 1431, Kemp was attacked by illness, and made his
precarious health an excuse for retiring from the chancellorship
in the following year. The enmity of the Duke of Gloucester,
whose influence was then paramount, was probably the real
reason for his retirement. He continued, however, to act as
a member of the council, and joined Cardinal Beaufort in
advising peace with France.
In 1435, a conference was held at Arras in France to negotiate
terms of peace. Archbishop Kemp was appointed leader of
the British embassy, and reached Arras with his companions
on July 25. In August, Kemp opened the conference by a
speech and took the lead in the negotiations until the arrival
of Cardinal Beaufort in September. The conference proved
a failure chiefly through the perfidy of the Duke of Burgundy
on whom no reliance could be placed, though he was nominally
an ally of the English. After prolonged discussions, the
English ambassadors withdrew, and returned to England,
angrily denouncing the treachery of Burgundy.3
In 1439, another conference was held near Calais, Cardinal
2 Ibid., p. 336.
3 Hook's Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, V. 190.
273
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Beaufort on the one side and the Duchess of Burgundy on the
other being appointed mediators. During the sitting of
this conference Kemp crossed twice to England to confer with
the king concerning the proposed treaty. The French offered
to make over Normandy to England as a fief, but the king
replied that we should be content only with Normandy and
Guienne in full sovereignty. Once more the negotiations
proved ineffectual, and Archbishop Kemp, after a stormy
passage, landed at Sandwich in a small boat on October 2,
1439. He immediately proceeded to London, where he
joined Beaufort in vainly imploring the king to take further
steps to end the French war.4
In the following December, Kemp was appointed cardinal-
priest of Santa Balbina by Pope Eugenius IV. This honour
the king persuaded him to accept in spite of the opposition
of Archbishop Chichele (q. v.).5
After the disgrace and death of Suffolk in 1350 (vide John
Stafford), Kemp was again appointed chancellor. Mean-
time the weakness of King Henry's government became
daily more apparent, and after the suppression of Cade's
rebellion, the Duke of York was acknowledged heir to the
throne, the king being still childless. Kemp now became the
chief supporter of the king's party, to whose influence he
owed his translation to the see of Canterbury. On
September 24, 1452, he received the pallium (sent by Pope
Nicholas V.) from the hands of his nephew, Thomas, Bishop
of London. A few weeks later, the additional honour was
conferred on him of being appointed cardinal-bishop of
Santa Rufina by the pope.
At the time of his elevation to the archbishopric of Canter-
bury, Kemp was seventy-two years of age, and his labours
were well-nigh over. In August of the following year King
Henry became seriously ill, and it was soon evident that his
mind was deranged. In October the aged archbishop stood
godfather to the king's infant son Edward. A deputation
of merchants and citizens waited on the archbishop at
Lambeth in January, 1455, to make certain complaints
concerning Lord Bonville, who had taxed the ships and goods of
4 Ibid.
s Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton (Rolls series), I., 43 to 50.
274
John Kemp
the Flemings. As the archbishop gave them no satisfactory
answer, they cried aloud, " Justice, justice." On this the
aged prelate was so dismayed that he had no word to say
for fear.6
Before the civil war actually began Kemp was called to
his rest. He died on March 22, 1454, and was buried in
Canterbury Cathedral on the south side of the choir. At
Wye, his native place, Archbishop Kemp rebuilt the parish
church, and also founded a college for secular priests, which
he placed under the patronage of Battle Abbey. He restored
the manor-house of Southwell, which belonged to the see of
York, and repaired York Cathedral. To Oxford he is said
to have given 500 marks for the completion of the divinity
school.
The following barbarous lines on him, composed by his
nephew Thomas, Bishop of London, are quoted by several
writers :
" Bis primus, ter presul
et bis cardine functus."
That Archbishop Kemp, after filling the highest offices in
Church and State during the troubled years that preceded the
civil war, should have descended to the grave with his character
unblemished, speaks well for his integrity and capacity as a
statesman. The king, on being informed of his death, said
that one of the wisest lords in the land was dead.7
6 Paston Letters, I. 268.
■> Ibid, Vol I. p. 315.
275
63.— THOMAS BOURCHIER, 1454 to i486.
Kings of England : Henry VI., 1422 to 1461.
Edward IV., 1461 to 1483.
Edward V., 1483.
Richard III., 1483 to 1485.
Henry VII., 1485 to 1509.
The death of Archbishop Kemp increased the difficulties
which beset the government. As soon as it became known
that the primate had breathed his last, a committee of the
Lords was appointed to wait on the king, then lying sick at
Windsor, to learn his pleasure concerning the archbishopric
and chancellorship, both rendered vacant by Kemp's death.
On March 25, the committee reported to the whole House
that they had been to wait on the king at Windsor, but had
been thrice refused admittance, being told that His Majesty
was sick. Two days later it was ascertained that the King
was insane, and the Lords appointed the Duke of York
protector of the kingdom. It was doubtless due to the duke's
influence that on March 30 the Commons recommended the
promotion of Thomas Bourchier, Bishop of Ely, to the see
of Canterbury.
Among the leading families connected by marriage with the
Duke of York were the Bourchiers, the half-brothers of the
Duke of Buckingham. Anne, eldest daughter of Thomas
of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, the youngest son of
Edward III., had by her second husband, Edmund, Earl of
Stafford, a son, Humphrey, created Duke of Buckingham
in 1444. Her third husband was William Bourchier, created
Earl of Ewe for his achievements in France under Henry V.
By him she had four sons, Henry Viscount Bourchier, William,
who became Lord Fitzwaryn by marriage, Thomas, Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, and John, afterwards Lord Berners.
Of these, Viscount Bourchier married Isabella, the only sister
of the Duke of York.1
1 Ramsey's Lancaster and York, Vol. II. p. 165.
276
Thomas Bourchier
Thomas Bourchier, the third son, was born about the year
1404, and was educated at Oxford, of which university he
afterwards became chancellor. After taking holy orders his
promotion was rapid, less on account of his abilities than of
his relationship to the royal family. Among the preferments
bestowed on him were the deanery of St. Martin's-le-Grand,
London, prebends at Lichfield, Hastings and Lincoln, and the
bishopric of Worcester, to which see he was consecrated in
T433- Two years later he was elected bishop of Ely, but
as the revenues of that see had been promised to Louis de
Luxembourg, Archbishop of Rouen, Bourchier was not trans-
lated to Ely until after the death of the latter in 1443. The
monkish historian of Ely states that during his ten year's
rule Bishop Bourchier never celebrated mass in their church
except on the day of his installation, and that he heavily
oppressed the prior and brethren by fines, and the tenants by
imprisonment.2
His translation to the see of Canterbury took place on
April 22, 1454. He appears to have gone through the
formality of receiving the temporalities of his see from the
king at Windsor, though the unfortunate monarch was
probably unconscious of what was taking place in his chamber.3
In March of the following year Bourchier was appointed Lord
Chancellor and received the Great Seal at Greenwich from
the king himself, who had by that time recovered temporarily.
The tale of Archbishop Bourchier's primacy is the tale of
that weary civil conflict known as the Wars of the Roses,
which began in 1455 and lasted for thirty years. It was
probably his close relationship with both sides which caused
him to be accused of playing a double part. His half brother,
the Duke of Buckingham, was an ardent royalist, while, as
already stated, his own brother, Viscount Bourchier, was
married to the sister of the Duke of York. The archbishop
was not distinguished by great vigour of mind, but his modera-
tion won for him the confidence of both parties, and the Lan-
castrians, while knowing him to be a Yorkist, frequently
employed him as a mediator. The double dealing of the Duke
of York throughout the conflict must indeed have rendered
2 Anglia Sacra, I., 671.
3 Paston Letters, I., p. 303.
277
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
it difficult for his partisans to play an honourable part. At
the first battle of St. Alban's in 1455 the Yorkists were vic-
torious, but for the next two years matters remained in an
uncertain state. In October, 1456, the archbishop was called
upon to resign the Great Seal, and at the same time his brother,
Viscount Bourchier, was dismissed from the office of treasurer.4
These changes were undoubtedly due to the influence of
Queen Margaret, who had found the Bourchiers lukewarm in
her cause. The archbishop seems, however, to have been
responsible in some measure for the hollow reconciliation
which took place between the rival parties in the spring of
1458. A great procession to St. Paul's was held, the rival
lords marching hand in hand and the king following with his
crown on his head. Behind them came the Duke of York
and the queen walking arm-in-arm. Before a year had passed
they were all quarrelling again.
At a convocation of the clergy held at St. Paul's on
July 3, 1360, the Yorkist leaders swore a solemn oath that
they had no design against the king. Archbishop Bourchier,
with five of his suffragans, then proceeded to Northampton
to confer with the king concerning terms of peace. But the
Yorkists acted with their usual insincerity. A week later
the king was taken prisoner at the battle of Northampton,
and conducted to London. Shortly afterwards, the Duke of
York, who had taken up his abode in the royal palace,
entered the House of Lords, and formally made his claim to
the crown of England. Archbishop Bourchier who was
present expressed disapproval of the duke's action, and
withdrew from the house.5
At the battle of Wakefield, fought on December 30, 1460,
the Duke of York was slain, but in the following year his son,
the young Earl of March, was crowned king with the title of
Edward IV. by Archbishop Bourchier. Four years later, on
May 26, 1465, the primate crowned Edward's queen, Elizabeth
Woodville.
At the request of Edward IV., Bourchier was created cardinal-
priest of St. Cyriacus in Thermis by Pope Paul II. in 1467.
He did not, however, receive the cardinal's hat until 1473.
4 Ibid., II., 381.
s Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, V., 268.
278
Thomas Bourchier
Throughout the reign of Edward IV. the archbishop continued
to show devotion to the Yorkist cause. In 1471 he is said to
have been instrumental in bringing about a reconciliation
between King Edward and his brother, the Duke of Clarence,
who had joined the Lancastrians.
In 1483, after the death of Edward IV., Archbishop Bour-
chier was sent by Richard of Gloucester to the queen with
the request that her second son might be allowed to keep his
brother company in the Tower. The archbishop solemnly
swore that he would answer with his life for the safety of the
prince, and it is practically certain that he had no suspicion
of Richard's evil designs. The unhappy mother yielded to
the archbishop's request. She is said to have called the boy
to her, given him one last hasty kiss, and then turning away
burst into tears.
A few weeks later, on June 26, 1483, the archbishop
crowned Richard III. at Westminster. By his popular
reforms Richard had succeeded in winning to his side many
who possessed characters less pliant than the archbishop.
Yet for the primate's heartless desertion of the little princes,
to whom he had taken an oath of allegiance after the death of
Edward IV. there is little excuse. It was only after the
murder of the princes in the tower that the he can have
fully understood the real character of the usurper. Two
months after the final triumph of Henry of Lancaster at
Bosworth Field on August 22, 1485, he crowned the
conqueror as King Henry VII. at Westminster.
The last act of the archbishop's eventful life was to officiate
at the wedding of Henry of Lancaster with Elizabeth of York.
This marriage, which united the white and red roses, brought
peace at last to England. The aged archbishop lived but a
few months longer. He died at his manor of Knole on April 6,
1486, at the age of eighty-two.
Of Archbishop Bourchier's ecclesiastical acts comparatively
little is recorded. In 1460 he held an important synod in
London, at which it was decided to appeal to parliament against
the injustice to which the clergy were frequently exposed
in the king's courts. At the convention of York in 1462,
it was determined that the constitutions of the southern
province should be incorporated with those of York ; thus
279
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
at length uniting the churches of Canterbury and York by
a common code of laws.6
In 1457, the famous scholar, Reginald Pecock, Bishop of
Chichester (vide John Stafford), was cited to appear before a
court under Archbishop Bourchier, and offered the choice
between making a public abjuration of his errors or being
delivered after degradation to the secular arm " as the food
of fire and fuel for the burning." Moved by fear he
withdrew the doctrines he had advocated, and was imprisoned
in* the abbey of Thorney, in Cambridgeshire, where he died
two years later.
An interesting document has recently been discovered by
the Rev. Claude Jenkins, M.A., librarian of Lambeth Palace.
It contains the roll of Archbishop Bourchier's household
accounts from October 4 to 31, 1459 ? Many curious and
interesting details are given relative to the prices of pro-
visions at that time. A large quantity of fish of various
kinds appears to have been consumed at the archbishop's
table. Thirteen calves, fourteen oxen, ninety-two sheep and
four pigs were consumed, apparently in addition to the
usual allowance. The average number of the household
during that time was between 130 and 140. The names
of guests staying in the house are given, and include
a papal legate. The rate of expenditure per annum is stated
to have been 5723 pounds.
6 Ibid, p. 280.
280
64.— JOHN MORTON, i486 to 1500.
King of England : Henry VII., 1485 to 1509.
John Morton, born about the year 1400, was the son of
Richard Morton of Milbourne St. Andrew, Dorset, by
Elizabeth his wife, daughter of Richard Turburville and
Cecilia Beauchamp. Richard Morton belonged originally
to a Nottinghamshire family, his father having been the first
to settle in Dorset. The house in which John is said to have
been born is still standing, and is situated on the Milbourne
Styleham side of the river, which divides that hamlet from
Milbourne St. Andrew. Until recently that portion of the
village was ecclesiastically united to Bere Regis.1
John was the eldest of five sons and received his early
education at Cerne Abbey, a Benedictine house near his home.
He afterwards studied at Balliol College, Oxford, of which
university he became vice-chancellor in 1446, and chancellor
in 1494. He was also appointed principal of Peckwater Inn,
Oxford, in 1453. After graduating as doctor of canon law,
he commenced his public career as an ecclesiastical lawyer
in the Court of Arches. This office brought him to the notice
of Archbishop Bourchier, to whom he owed many of his prefer-
ments in Church and State.2 These included the sub-deanery
of Lincoln, the rectory of Blokesworth, near Bere Regis, which
was probably a family living, the rectory of St. Dunstan's-in-
the-West London (1472), prebends at Salisbury, Lincoln and
St. Paul's, and the archdeaconries of Winchester and Chester
(1474).
During the civil wars Morton attached himself to the Lan-
castrian side, and in 1456 was made chancellor to Prince
Edward, the son of Henry VI. After the battle of Towton,
Morton is believed to have accompanied King Henry and his
family in their flight to Scotland. For his devotion to the
* R. I. Woodhouse, Life of John Morton, p. i.
2 Ibid., p. 48.
28l
10
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
dethroned monarch he was attainted by Edward IV., and all
his possessions confiscated. In 1462 he was among those
who sailed with Queen Margaret from Bamborough to Sluys,
in Flanders.3 where she arrived in an almost destitute con-
dition, without change of raiment for herself or her attendants,
and depending for her daily bread on the purse of De Breze.
He remained for some time in her company with other Lan-
castrians at St. Mihiel in Bar, living under the protection of
the Duke of Burgundy.
Meanwhile, the Earl of Warwick laid schemes for placing
the Duke of Clarence, brother of Edward IV., on the throne.
The plot was discovered by King Edward, and Warwick
was forced to escape with the duke to France. While there,
he was persuaded by Louis XI. to become reconciled to Queen
Margaret, and pledged himself to support the Lancastrians.
The negotiations between Queen Margaret and the earl were
conducted by Morton, who landed with Warwick at Dartmouth
on September 13, 1470. Warwick who was soon joined by
many of the nobles, despatched Morton with Sir John Fortescue
to London, to prepare the citizens for his coming. During
the short restoration of Henry VI. nothing is recorded of
Morton. After the battle of Barnet in April, 1471, in which
Warwick and his brother were slain, Morton hastened to join
Queen Margaret, who on the very day of the battle had landed
in England. She succeeded in raising an army from the western
counties, but was defeated by Edward IV. at Tewkesbury
on May 4. Her son, Prince Edward, now a youth of eighteen,
was cruelly slain after the battle by Richard, Duke of
Gloucester. A few days later, Henry VI. died in the Tower.
These tragic events having left no immediate successor
of the House of Lancaster, Morton sued for a pardon, and
obtained the reversal of his attainder in the following year.
Edward IV. seems to have treated him with complete con-
fidence, and in 1472 he was appointed Master of the Rolls.
Two years later he was employed on an embassy to Nuys,
in Germany, then under siege, to negotiate a treaty with the
Duke of Burgundy against Louis XL of France.4
Edward IV. now revived the old claim to the French
3 William Wyrcester, Annates Rerum Anglicarum, II., 496.
1 Paston Letters, III. 123.
282
John Morton
throne, and in the summer of 1475 set out for France with a
large army. He was accompanied by Morton, who took an
important part in drawing up the treaty with the French
king. The wily Louis XI. beguiled Edward to a personal
interview, and offered him and his nobles money to stop
the invasion. Morton was one of those who received a
considerable sum.5
On January 31, 1478, Morton was consecrated bishop of
Ely, and resigned the mastership of the Rolls. He attended
King Edward IV. on his deathbed, in 1483, and was
appointed one of the executors of his will. On June 13,
1483, he was present at the council held by Richard,
Duke of Gloucester, at Westminster, when the children of
Edward IV. were declared to be bastards, and Richard's
claim to the throne admitted. Richard courteously
requested the bishop of Ely to send him some of the
famous strawberries from his garden at Holborn, the
London manor belonging to his see. The duke then retired
from the council, but returned after an interval, and ordered
the arrest of Morton and other Lancastrians who were
known to be loyal adherents of the boy-king Edward V.6
Morton was imprisoned in the Tower, but was afterwards
conveyed to Brecknock Castle, in Wales, where he remained
under the guardianship of the Duke of Buckingham. Certain
remarkable conversations which took place between Bucking-
ham and his prisoner at Brecknock are recorded in the
Chronicles of Grafton and Hall, the accounts given being
evidently derived from the bishop himself. They prove that
Morton showed much subtlety in leading the duke to open his
mind concerning Richard. Buckingham finally declared that
he was quite ready to join Morton and his friends in deposing
the king. When the plot had been matured, Morton begged
leave to go to Ely to raise funds, but Buckingham was un-
willing to let him depart. While the duke still hesitated,
Morton fled secretly by night in disguise. He proceeded to
Ely, where he found money and friends, and thence crossed
to Flanders. Buckingham's arrest and execution quickly
followed.
s Ramsey's Lancaster and York, II. 413.
6 Ibid., p. 485.
283
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
During his residence in Flanders, Morton entered into
correspondence with Henry of Lancaster, to whom he
rendered great service by informing him of Richard's projects
against him. Lancaster was no sooner established on the
throne as Henry VII. than he recalled Morton to England,
and loaded him with favours. In October, i486 he was chosen
to succeed Cardinal Bourchier as archbishop of Canterbury,
and in the following March was appointed Lord Chancellor
of England. In 1493, Pope Alexander VI., at Henry's request,
made him cardinal of St. Anastasia.
His first efforts as archbishop were directed to the reforma-
tion of the clergy. At a synod which he convened at St. Paul's
in March, 1487, he severely rebuked the clergy of London for
effeminately wearing long hair, and open coats, and for
frequenting taverns.7
The avarice of Henry VII. caused the archbishop to be
implicated in carrying out certain oppressive measures. To
meet the expenses of the French war, Henry raised forced loans,
which he called benevolences, from his subjects, and Morton
as chancellor was employed in organizing their collection.
In connection with these loans a witty saying of Morton has
been preserved. " If," said he, " the persons applied to for
benevolence live frugally, tell them that their parsimony
must have enriched them, and that the king will therefore
expect from them a liberal donation ; if their method of
living on the contrary be extravagant, tell them that they
can afford to give largely, since the proof of their opulence is
evident from their expenditure." This dilemma from which
there was no escape was called " Morton's Fork," or " Morton's
Crutch."8
In 1489, he obtained from the pope a bull authorizing him
to visit certain exempt monasteries. This enabled him to
take vigorous measures against the monastery of St. Albans,
where he insisted that a reformation of abuses should be
effected within sixty days.
To both Ely and Canterbury, Morton was a liberal bene-
factor, restoring their cathedrals and repairing their palaces.
At Ely he caused the fens to be drained by a cut called
7 Edward Foss, The Judges of England, V., 62.
8 Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, V., 476.
284
John Morton
Morton's Leame, more than twelve miles long, from Peter-
borough to Wisbech. The poor were not forgotten by him
either in his lifetime or in his will, and both Oxford and
Cambridge shared in his bounty. At Oxford he repaired the
school of canon law and completed St. Mary's Church. He
also founded five scholarships at St. John's College, Cam-
bridge.9 While bishop of Ely, his chief recreation was the
cultivation of his extensive gardens and orchards at Holbom.
Morton took young Thomas More, afterwards the famous
chancellor, into his household, and predicted for him a great
career.
The history of Richard III. attributed to More is believed
to have been first written in Latin by Archbishop Morton.
Morton translated Cardinal Bonaventura's " Mirrour of the
Blessed Life of Jesu," from the Latin. In his later years he
became much broken by age and infirmities, and died of
quartan ague after a long illness at his manor of Knole, in
Kent, on September 13, 1500. He was buried in the crypt
of Canterbury Cathedral, but the tomb cracked, exposing his
bones, which were stolen, gradually disappearing one by one
till only his skull remained. This was given by Archbishop
Sheldon to his brother Ralph in 1670.
Morton is said to have been of middle stature, and in the
prime of life his strength was prodigious. His countenance
was such as to compel reverence, and while he allowed no undue
familiarity, he was not difficult of approach. Thomas More,
who knew him intimately, gives the highest praise to his
intellectual and moral worth, and declares him to have been
endowed with extraordinary natural gifts of memory and
understanding.10
9 The Judges of England, V., 64.
ro R. I. Woodhouse, Life of John Morton, p. 98.
285
65.— HENRY DEANE, 1501 to 1503.
King of England : Henry VII., 1485 to 1509.
Concerning the parentage and early life of Henry Deane
nothing is known. The tradition that he belonged to the
ancient family of Deane, who, since the reign of Henry I.,
had been settled at St. Briavel's Castle in the Forest of Dean,
has not been authenticated ; nor has the statement of Foss
that he was a Welshman sufficient evidence to support it.
In a letter addressed by Deane, after he became primate, to
the members of Oxford University he calls that university
his " benignissima mater,"1 from which it is inferred that he
was educated there.
The first authenticated fact concerning Deane is that in
the reign of Edward IV. he became prior of LlanthoniaSecunda,
near Gloucester, a cell of the priory of canons of St. Austin
at Llanthony, in Monmouthshire. In 1481, Edward IV., on
account of the incursions of the Welsh, united the two priories,
making the cell at Gloucester the principal house. The right
of patronage, with all the possessions of Llanthonia Prima,
was granted to Henry Deane prior, for 300 marks, on condition
that a native prior and four canons should be maintained in
Monmouthshire.2
The prior of Llanthony is said to have been indebted for
preferment to Archbishop Morton, who recommended him
to King Henry VII. In September, 1495, he was appointed
chancellor of Ireland, where the cause of the impostor Perkin
Warbeck, who pretended to be a son of the Duke of Clarence,
had been warmly espoused. The king now placed Ireland
under the nominal government of his son Henry, Duke of
York, with Sir Edward Poynings, as deputy,3 and a con-
1 Wood, Athena Oxon (ed. Bliss), p. 691.
2 Archceological Journal, Vol. XVIII. 256.
J Letters and Papers of Reigns of Richard III. and Henry VII.
(Rolls series), II., 376.
286
Henry Deane
ciliatory policy was adopted. Through the energy of the
deputy and chancellor, who is described as a man of great wit
and diligence, the disaffected nobles were brought to obedience.
Deane prevailed on the Irish parliament to pass the statute
known as Poynings' Act, by which it was decreed that hence-
forth no parliament should be held in Ireland until the pro-
posed acts were approved in England. In the following June,
Deane was constituted justiciary of Ireland in the absence of
Poynings. The ability displayed by Deane in the conduct of
Irish affairs was not overlooked by Henry VII., who in 1496
nominated him bishop of Bangor. While occupying this see,
he was permitted to retain the priory of Llanthony in com-
mendam. At that period the diocese of Bangor had fallen
into a deplorable condition. Since the rebellion of Owen
Glendower in the reign of Henry IV., the cathedral had been
in ruins. The bishop had ceased to reside there, and the
property of the see had been seized by the nobles.4
Bishop Deane addressed himself with great energy to remedy
these evils, and to reclaim the ecclesiastical property of the
see. The Isle of Seals, known as the Skerries, at the northern
extremity of Anglesey, had at one time belonged to the see of
Bangor, but had now passed by purchase into the hands of
a certain Sir William Griffith, whose family claimed the ex-
clusive right of the fisheries. On October 7, 1496, Bishop
Deane, having determined to assert his rights, went with a
well-armed party to the island, and concluded a good day's
sport by the capture of twenty-eight large fish called
" grampas." As the bishop and his party were leaving the
island, they were met by the son of Sir William Griffith
with a train of armed followers, who seized the fish. A
battle ensued, in which the fish were recaptured by the
bishop. After this victory he appears to have succeeded
in establishing his claim to the fisheries of the island.5 Before
his translation to the bishopric of Salisbury in 1499, Deane
had recovered nearly all the property of the see. He refused
to leave Bangor until he had received a guarantee that the
reparation of the cathedral, which he had begun, would be
continued by his successor.
« Parker's De Aniiq. Brit. Eccles., p. 301.
5 Hook, Lives of the Archbishops of Cant., V., 511.
287
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Deane occupied the see of Salisbury little more than a
year. During that time he received the Great Seal with the
title of Lord Keeper, and was employed in negotiating the
marriage of Princess Margaret, the daughter of Henry VII.,
with James IV. of Scotland.
On the death of Archbishop Morton, Thomas Langton,
Bishop of Winchester, was elected to the see of Canterbury,
but died of the plague before his translation could be effected.
The king then requested the chapter of Canterbury to
nominate Henry Deane, Bishop of Salisbury, to the vacant
see. This was accordingly done, and his election was readily
confirmed by Pope Alexander VI., by a bull dated May 26,
1501. The pope is said to have been specially willing at this
time to oblige Henry VII., who in the previous year had per-
mitted a papal envoy to collect tribute in England, on the
pretence that the money was to be used for a crusade against
the Turks.6
Deane was soon afterwards appointed papal legate, in
order that he might have authority to visit the exempt
monasteries. On November 14, 1501, he officiated with nine-
teen bishops at the marriage of Prince Arthur with Catherine
of Aragon. A detailed account of the magnificent wedding
ceremony and the festivities which followed has been pre-
served.7
In the summer of 1502, the archbishop's health began to
fail, and he resigned the Great Seal. He died at Lambeth
on February 15, 1503. As he was never rich enough to
be enthroned, his donations to various charitable objects
reflect great credit on his character. He rebuilt a consider-
able part of the episcopal manor at Otford, and repaired
Rochester Bridge.
For his funeral expenses he left the sum of £500. Accord-
ing to the directions in his will, his body was conveyed from
Lambeth to Faversham in a barge, rowed by thirty-three
sailors, dressed in black, and bearing each a lighted candle. At
Faversham the coffin was placed on a funeral car, surmounted
by an effigy of the archbishop arrayed in full pontificals.
6 Parker's De Antiq. Brit. Eccles., p. 302.
7 Letters and Papers of Reigns of Richard III. and Henry VII. (Rolls
series), I. 411.
288
Henry Deane
Fifty torches blazed round the bier, and sixty gentlemen
followed on horseback to Canterbury. On February 24,
the funeral took place in Canterbury Cathedral. One of his
executors was Thomas Wolsey, the future cardinal, who had
been a chaplain in his household. The executors faithfully
carried out the directions concerning his funeral, but dis-
regarded many of his bequests and donations. His will,
which is a curious document, has been preserved.8
8 ArchcBologicai Journal, VoL XVIII. p. 256.
289
66.— WILLIAM WARHAM, 1503 to 1532.
Kings of England : Henry VII., 1485 to 1509.
Henry VIII., 1509 to 1547.
The figure of the last primate of Canterbury to die under
the old regime cannot fail to be a pathetic one. For well-
nigh a thousand years, since the day when the illustrious
monk sent by Gregory the Great had founded at Canter-
bury the first English Church, its links with the Mother
Church at Rome had remained unbroken. In spite of
the injustice, tyranny and oppression long practised by the
Roman see, in spite of the corruption and vice of the pontiffs
of the middle ages, England as a whole had continued loyal
to Rome. The great change which was now at hand was
only part of a wide intellectual and political movement, the
natural outcome of which many of our greatest churchmen
were slow to discern. Those who, like Archbishop Warham,
remained faithful to the old traditions could contemplate
only with dismay the revolutionary hurricane which seemed
about to sweep away the very bulwarks of the ancient faith.
It is little wonder if, after a long, hopeless struggle against the
forces which overwhelmed him, his courage at last failed
him, and at the age of fourscore years he died broken-
hearted.
William Warham was born about the year 1450, and was
the son of Robert Warham, a gentleman of good family,
settled at Malshanger, in the parish of Church Oakley, Hamp-
shire. He was educated at Winchester, and at New College,
Oxford, of which university he became a fellow, and in 1506
chancellor. On leaving the university he became an advocate
in the Court of Arches, and in 1491 was sent with others by
Henry VII. to a diet at Antwerp to settle certain disputes
with the Hanse merchants.1 His eloquence and legal ability
1 Cat. of State Papers (Venetian), Vol. II., p. 271.
290
ARCHBISHOP WARHAM.
(From the minting bv Holbein in Lambeth Palace.)
William Warham
caused him to be employed frequently on State affairs. He
accompanied an embassy to Flanders to protest against the
support given to the usurper Perkin Warbeck, and soon
afterwards went to Spain to take part in the negotiations
which preceded the marriage of Prince Arthur with Catherine
of Aragon. In 1494 he was appointed Master of the Rolls.
Shortly before this he had taken holy orders, and was pre-
ferred to livings in Herts and Cambridgeshire. In 1501 he
was consecrated bishop of London, and on the death of
Archbishop Deane was promoted to the see of Canterbury
by a bull of Pope Julius II., dated November 29, 1503.
Two years previous to this he had been made keeper of the
Great Seal, a title which he exchanged for that of Lord Chan-
cellor in 1504.
Warham's enthronement at Canterbury took place on
March 9, 1504. The banquet which followed was sump-
tuous beyond description, "all the archbishop's honours
were drawn, depicted and delineated after a strange manner
on gilded marchpane upon the banqueting dishes." Though
Warham was famous for his hospitality, often entertaining as
many as two hundred guests at his table, he lived himself
very simply, and cared nothing for the amusements in which
other prelates then frequently engaged. His favourite re-
laxation was to sup with some group of scholarly visitors,
enjoying their wit, and retorting with wit of his own. Scholars
found a sure welcome under his hospitable roof, and his purse
was ever open to relieve their wants. At Warham's palace
at Lambeth, Erasmus, the famous scholar of Rotterdam,
first met Colet and More, the leaders of that little band of
English humanists known as the Oxford Reformers, who did
much to prepare the way for the Reformation. To induce
Erasmus to settle in England, Warham offered him a living
in Kent, and repeatedly sent him gifts of money. It was to
Archbishop Warham that Erasmus addressed the preface of his
" St. Jerome." " From Warham none ever parted in sorrow,"
wrote the famous scholar, after his faithful friend had passed
to his rest.
Yet, in spite of his marked ability and integrity, the humility
of Warham frequently displayed itself in a weak surrender
of his will to the tyranny of Henry VIII., and his chief
291
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
minister, Cardinal Wolsey. In 1515 the Great Seal was re-
signed by Warham, and bestowed on Wolsey. The arch-
bishop had for some years earnestly desired to retire from
public life and was only too glad to be released from the burden
of office. His resignation at this time is said to have been
partly due to his disapproval of the aid given by Henry to the
Emperor against France and Venice.2 His private relations
with Wolsey, from whom he frequently declared that he had
received much kindness, continued friendly until the death of
the cardinal. The same cannot be said, however, of their
official relations. The dictatorial and overbearing character
of the cardinal led him to interfere unduly with the arch-
bishop's jurisdiction, but though Warham remonstrated on
more than one occasion against the invasion of his rights, he
usually ended by submitting to Wolsey. For his submission
to the heavy taxation imposed by Wolsey on the clergy in
order to meet the king's demands, Warham was called " an old
fool."
In 1520, Warham accompanied Henry VIII. to France,
and was present at the meeting with Francis I. at the Field
of the Cloth of Gold. He afterwards went with the king to
Gravelines to meet the emperor.
Luther's doctrines had meantime penetrated to England,
though as yet their acceptance was confined to the few. On
May 13, 1521, Wolsey considered it advisable publicly to
denounce these doctrines, and to burn certain of Luther's
works. A procession of bishops, headed by Cardinal Wolsey,
Archbishop Warham, and ambassadors from the pope and
emperor, proceeded to St. Paul's. Warham opened the
proceedings by a laudatory oration in praise of the cardinal.
The bishop of Rochester then preached a sermon condemning
the doctrines of Friar Martin Luther, and concluded by
reading a brief from the pope. The assembled prelates then
proceeded to St. Paul's Cross, where a platform had been
erected, from which they solemnly witnessed the lighting of
a bonfire, in which the condemned books were consumed. The
terrible anathemas pronounced on Luther by Wolsey during
the conflagration profoundly impressed the Londoners. The
ceremony lasted until after 2 p.m. The cardinal afterwards
• Ibid., p. 310.
292
William Warham
invited the ambassadors and bishops to dine with him, and a
sumptuous banquet followed.3
In the business of Henry's divorce from Catherine of Aragon,
Warham was not called upon to take any prominent part.
He is said to have disapproved from the first of the papal
dispensation, which had permitted the marriage to take place.
In 1527 he assisted Wolsey in the secret inquiry concerning
the validity of the marriage, and appears to have been deluded
by the cardinal into believing that doubts had originated not
with the king, but with the bishop of Tarbes. He was one of
the counsellors nominated to support the queen's cause,
but Catherine, on hearing of this, declared that he would be of
little help to her, since he would advise nothing contrary to
the king's wishes. This unfortunately appears to have been
only too true.*
Warham wrote to the university of Oxford urging the
divines to come to a speedy decision on the question
of the divorce. He also signed the letter sent by the
bishops of England to Clement VII., urging the pope to
annul the king's marriage with Catherine. Henry afterwards
proposed that the venerable archbishop should try the case
himself, but the pope justly refused to agree to this, as Warham
had already given his decision in the king's favour.
After the disgrace and death of Wolsey, the king, by right
of the Statute of Praemunire, claimed from the clergy an
enormous fine for having acquiesced in the authority con-
ferred by the pope on Wolsey as cardinal-legate. Warham
presided at the convocation of 1531 which voted 100,000
pounds to the king, in order to avoid the penalties
which he declared had been incurred. Henry consented
to accept this sum on the understanding that he was
acknowledged by the clergy as " supreme Lord of the Church,
and as much as Christ's law permits supreme Head."
Towards the close of his life Warham seems to have
shown more independence. In February, 1532, he protested
against all the acts that had been passed since 1329, against
the papal authority, and the liberties of the Church. But the
3 Ibid., Vol III., p. 122.
♦ Cf . Art. on Archbishop Warham by James Gairdner in Diet, of Nat.
Biog.
293
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
final submission of the clergy to the king a few months later
broke his heart. He was overtaken by his last illness while
on a visit to his nephew, William, Archdeacon of Canterbury,
at St. Stephen's, Hackington, near Canterbury. On learning
that his end was near, he summoned his steward to his bed-
side, and inquired what money remained in his coffers. He
was told thirty pounds. " Satis viatici ad ccelum," he said.3
He died on August 22, 1532, and was buried in a small chapel
built by himself in Canterbury Cathedral on the north side of
the Martyrdom of St. Thomas. One of his last acts had been
to commit to writing his solemn protestation against the
statutes published by parliament in derogation of the Roman
pontiff and the apostolic see, or in diminution of the rights,
privileges, customs and liberties, which belonged to the Church
of Canterbury.
" This weak exprobration," writes Dixon, " was the last
instrument of an English primate who died legate of the
apostolic see ; and when the hand that wrote it, stiff in
death, but wearing still in funeral state the consecrated
glove, in which it had often been raised to celebrate the
great mystery of the Catholic faith, was pressing to the
yet unburied breast of the writer the golden cross of
Canterbury, the proud dominion of a thousand years was
already gone for ever. The scene was clearing for the
new actors."6
5 Hook, Lives of the Archbishops. Vol. VII., p. 420.
6 Hist, of the Church of England. Vol. I., p. 144.
294
ARCHBISHOP CRANMER.
(After the portrait by Holbein in Jesui College, Cambridge.)
67.— THOMAS CRANMER, 1533 to 1556.
Kings of England : Henry VIII., 1509 to 1547.
Edward VI., 1547 to 1553.
Mary I., 1553 to 1558.
Thomas Cranmer was born at Aslacton, in Nottinghamshire,
on July 2, 1489. He was the second son of Thomas
Cranmer (who belonged to an old family, originally of Lincoln-
shire), by his wife, Anne Hatfield, daughter of Laurence
Hatfield, of Willoughby. He received his early education,
probably at a grammar school near his home, " from a mar-
vellous severe and cruel schoolmaster, whose tyranny towards
youth was such that he dulled the tender and fine wits of his
scholars, till they commonly more hated and abhorred good
literature than favoured and embraced the same."1
Thomas Cranmer the elder, who was a keen sportsman,
caused his son to be instructed in all manly exercises. None
could manage a pack of hounds or handle the long bow with
more dexterity or the cross bow with a surer aim. In horse-
manship he so excelled that even after he became archbishop
he could ride the roughest horse in his stables. At the age
of fourteen Thomas, who had by this time lost his father, was
sent to Cambridge by his mother. About the year 15 n he
took the degree of B.A. and was elected a fellow of Jesus
College. Shortly afterwards he was forced to resign his
fellowship on account of his marriage with Black Joan,2 who
is said to have been niece to the landlady of the Dolphin Inn
at Cambridge. His wife died in child-birth a year after his
marriage, and he was immediately afterwards re-elected to his
fellowship. It was probably the death of his wife which
decided him to take holy orders, and about the year 1523
he graduated doctor of divinity. About this time he is said
to have been elected a fellow of the college founded by Cardinal
1 Ralph Morice's Anecdotes of Archbishop Cranmer (Camden Soc.),
P- 259.
* Cooper, Athena Cantab., I., 145.
295
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Wolsey at Oxford, but he declined to leave Cambridge, where
he was soon afterwards appointed lecturer in divinity at Jesus
College, and examiner in the same subject to the university.
In August 1529, an epidemic known as the sweating sickness
broke out in Cambridge, in consequence of which the schools
were closed, and the scholars dispersed. Cranmer with two
of his pupils retired to the house of their father, Mr. Cressy,
a gentleman of property, living at Waltham in Essex.
Cranmer 's brief sojourn at Essex was destined to alter his
career in an unexpected manner.
At this time the king happened to pass through Waltham,
and two of his chief counsellors, Gardiner, the Secretary of
State, afterwards bishop of Winchester, and Dr. Fox, Lord
High Almoner, afterwards bishop of Hereford, were lodged
in Mr. Cressy's house. There they met Cranmer, to whom
they were well known, being both heads of colleges at Cam-
bridge.3 The conversation naturally turned on the subject
of the king's divorce, which was at this time agitating Europe.
The legatine court which should have decided the business
had just been dissolved, leaving the affair in its old un-
certainty. Cranmer suggested that the opinions of all the
universities in Europe should be sought on the legality of
marriage with a deceased brother's wife. If the universities
were unanimous in declaring such a marriage illegal, the case
could be decided in the ordinary ecclesiastical courts without
an appeal to the pope. Cranmer's suggestion was afterwards
reported to Henry, who declared with an oath that he had
" gotten the right sow by the ear." He was summoned by
the king to Greenwich, and ordered to lay aside all his occu-
pations in order to devote himself to the preparation of a
treatise in favour of the divorce. He was meantime appointed
chaplain to the Earl of Wiltshire, Anne Boleyn's father, in
whose house at Durham Place, overlooking the Thames, he
lived for several months. In January, 1530, he accompanied
the Earl of Wiltshire andDr. Stokesley, Bishop-elect of London,
on an embassy to the Emperor Charles V. He also visited
Rome, where he was honourably received. Pope Clement VII .
appointed him Grand Penitentiary of England, but refused
to give any definite decision regarding the divorce.
3 Ibid., 146.
296
Thomas Cranmer
Cranmer returned to England in 15 31, but was imme-
diately afterwards despatched to Germany as an ambassador
to the emperor. While in that country, he had a secret
interview with John Frederick, Duke of Saxony, to whom he
delivered letters for the German princes of the Protestant
League, assuring them of King Henry's friendship. He also
concluded a commercial treaty between England and the Low
Countries.4 During his residence at Nuremberg, he formed an
intimacy withOsiander, the famous Protestant reformer, whose
niece Margaret he married.
On the death of Archbishop Warham in 1532, King Henry
determined to promote Cranmer to the archbishopric of
Canterbury. The election of a comparatively obscure cleric
to the highest office in the Church excited considerable in-
dignation among the suffragan bishops. Henry succeeded,
however, in obtaining from Rome the necessary papal bulls
for the confirmation of his election.
Cranmer was at Mantua, whither he had accompanied
the emperor, when he received news of his promotion. He
was reluctant to accept the high office, and sent letters to the
king urging that his recent marriage disqualified him from
holding the archbishopric. He then sent his wife to England,
but delayed his own return for seven weeks in the vain hope
that the king might change his purpose. But Henry had
already determined to make use of the new primate to obtain
the divorce.
On March 30, 1533, he was consecrated archbishop in the
chapter-house of St. Stephen's College, Westminster, by the
bishops of Lincoln, Exeter and St. Asaph. Before taking
the usual oath of obedience to the see of Rome, he made a
protestation declaring that by the oath he did not bind
himself to anything contrary to the laws of God, the king's
prerogative, or the statutes of the kingdom, nor did he tie
himself from speaking his mind freely in matters relating to the
reformation of religion or the government of the Church.
Before Cranmer's return to England, the king had privately
married Anne Boleyn. Meantime the universities of Oxford,
Cambridge and Paris had pronounced in favour of the divorce,
but those of Germany, influenced by the opinions of Luther,
« Ibid.
297
20
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
declined to follow suit. In May, 1533, Queen Catherine, who
was staying at Ampthill in Bedfordshire, was summoned
before an ecclesiastical court at Dunstable, a place four miles
distant. Refusing to appear, she was declared contumacious,
and Archbishop Cranmer pronounced her marriage with the
king null and void, and her daughter, the Princess Mary,
illegitimate.
On June 1, Cranmer crowned Anne Boleyn with great
pomp at Westminster. Anne drove to the cathedral in a
white chariot drawn by palfreys in white damask. She was
dressed in white tissue robes, her fair hair flowing loose over
her shoulders, and her temples decorated with a coronet
of gold and diamonds. " Three short years were yet to pass
and again on a summer morning Queen Anne Boleyn was to
leave the Tower of London, not radiant then with beauty
on a gay errand of coronation, but a poor wandering ghost
on a sad tragic errand, from which she would never more
return." 5
On September 1, 1533, Cranmer stood godfather to Anne's
child, the future Queen Elizabeth. On the committal of Anne
to the Tower on May 2, 1536, Archbishop Cranmer visited her
and afterwards interceded on her behalf with the king. But his
feeble intercessions proved as fruitless as they had been a
short time previously in the cases of Bishop Fisher and Sir
Thomas More. Fourteen days later Cranmer was induced
to pronounce Anne's marriage with the king null and void.
Her execution took place on May 19, and on the following
day Cranmer granted a licence for the king's marriage with
Jane Seymour.
On June 6, 1540, the archbishop married Henry to Anne
of Cleves, whose divorce he pronounced six months later. In
1541 the painful duty devolved on him of conveying to King
Henry the news of Catherine Howard's infidelity. For
Cranmer's weak acquiescence to the king's will in these
matrimonal scandals no excuse can be offered. He appears
to have permitted himself to be used as a tool in the
hands of the tyrannical monarch.
John Rogers, writing under the pseudonym of Matthew, had
produced a Bible in English embodying the translations of
s Froude, Hist, of England, Vol. I., pp. 464 to 465.
298
Thomas Cranmer
Tyndale and Coverdale. This version was approved by
Cranmer, who believed it to be an entirely new one,
and in 1538 he procured from the king an order that
an English Bible should be placed in every parish church.
The work of reforming the service books was taken in hand
by the Convocation of Canterbury in 1542. An English
version of the Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments, and
an English Litany written by Cranmer were produced.
In the dissolution of the religious houses which was carried out
chiefly by Thomas Cromwell, the vicar-general, Cranmer took
little part. In the autumn of 1538 the shrine of St. Thomas
of Canterbury was destroyed by Henry's orders. The costly
jewels and treasures belonging to the shrine filled twenty-six
carts in which the spoil was conveyed to London. A letter
has been preserved written to Cromwell by Archbishop
Cranmer, dated August 18, 1538, in which he mentions his
suspicion that the blood of St. Thomas exhibited at Christ
Church, Canterbury, was " but a forged thing made of red
ochre and such like matter."6
Most of the confiscated wealth was squandered by the
king, with the exception of a small portion devoted to
the creation of six new sees poorly endowed and to the
establishment of Trinity College, Cambridge. In 1541,
the cathedral church at Canterbury underwent a change, the
monastic foundation being replaced by a dean and chapter.
While denying the papal supremacy, Henry insisted on
retaining all the doctrines of the Catholic Church. In 1539,
Parliament passed the Act of the Six Articles for abolishing
diversity of opinion. This act made the repudiation of the
Catholic doctrines on the one hand and the acknowledgment
of the pope's authority on the other crimes alike punishable
with death. The denial of the doctrine of Transubstantiation
was accounted heresy, and the marriage of priests was for-
bidden. This obliged Cranmer to put away his wife, whom
he had kept in seclusion since his elevation to the primacy.
There is a story that in order to retain her company Cranmer
carried her about in a chest, with holes bored in the top to
admit the air. On one occasion a porter, when removing
6 Remains of Thomas Cranmer, Jenkyns' ed. Vol. I., p. 262.
299
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the chest, placed it upside down, and the lady had to make her
presence known by her screams.7
Many so-called heretics of wholly opposite opinions were
examined by Cranmer, and suffered death under the Act of
the Six Articles. The archbishop had many enemies, chief
among whom was Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, who was
bitterly opposed to the changes which had been made. At his
instigation the suffragans accused Cranmer of heresy, but
he was protected by Henry VIII.8
In January 1547, Cranmer was summoned to the deathbed
of the king, but when he arrived Henry was speechless. The
archbishop, " speaking comfortable words," bent over the
dying tyrant and begged for some sign of his faith in Christ.
Henry made an effort to grasp Cranmer's hand, and expired.
By his will he had elected sixteen of the chief men in England,
among whom the archbishop was included, to govern the
kingdom during the minority of his son Edward. But the
chief power immediately passed into the hands of the young
king's uncle, the Earl of Hereford, who was created Duke of
Somerset and Protector of England. On February 20,
Cranmer crowned Edward VI. at Westminster.
Though Cranmer had little share in the government during
Edward's reign, he played a leading part in the ecclesiastical
changes effected. The persecution of heretics continued. In
I55°> J°an Bocher was burnt for heresy, and the archbishop
is said to have persuaded the young king to sign the warrant
for her execution.
Somerset, who belonged to the Lutheran party, gave
orders that all the altars, pictures and images of saints
should be removed from the churches. This was done in a
manner which gave offence to many who from childhood
had been accustomed to reverence the images as holy.
In 1648, the Act of the Six Articles was repealed, thus per-
mitting the marriage of the clergy, and Cranmer's wife
returned from Germany. Two reformed Prayer Books were
issued during Edward's reign, the first in 1548 and the second
in 1552. The first, which was compiled in haste, owed much
* A. F. Pollard, Thomas Cranmer, p. 325.
8 Strype's Memorials of Archbishop Cranmer, Vol. I., p. 185, cf.
Shakespeare's Henry VIII., Act V.
300
Thomas Cranmer
to the influence of German reformers ; the second bore evidence
of a more national spirit.
In 1549, the first Act of Uniformity was passed, enforcing
the use of the English Prayer Book for public worship. In-
surrections immediately broke out in Devon and Cornwall.
The rebels drew up a petition consisting of Fifteen Articles,
in which they demanded the restoration of the Latin mass,
the use of images and the restitution of the Act of the Six
Articles. Archbishop Cranmer drew up a reply to the petition,
in which he attempted to show the inconsistency of many of
their demands. The insurrections were gradually quelled,
chiefly through the energetic measures taken by the Earl of
Warwick.
In 1552, the Forty-two Articles of religion, afterwards
reduced to the well-known Thirty-nine, were compiled by
Cranmer. He also undertook the codification of the canon law,
which had been begun before the death of Henry VIII.
Cranmer's " Defence of the True and Catholic Doctrine of the
Sacrament " was first published in 1550. To this work
Gardiner sent a reply from the Tower where he had been
confined, and Cranmer was forced to prepare a more elaborate
treatise to refute that of Gardiner.
After the execution of Somerset, the chief power passed to
Warwick, who was created Earl of Northumberland. He
belonged to the Protestant party, but his selfish and am-
bitious character caused him to act entirely in his own
interests. It was chiefly due to his influence that Edward VI.
was induced to set aside the claims of his half-sister Mary to
the crown, in order that a Protestant succession might be
secured through Lady Jane Grey, Northumberland's
daughter-in-law. In July 1553, Cranmer was summoned to
the death-bed of the young king, who begged him to sign the
document bequeathing the crown of England to Lady Jane
Grey. Though as an executor of the will of Henry VIII.
Cranmer had pledged himself to support Mary, he yielded with
characteristic weakness to the dying king's urgent entreaties,
thus committing himself to the cause of Lady Jane Grey.
After the failure of Northumberland's scheme, and the
accession of Mary Tudor, Cranmer was summoned before the
council, reprimanded for his disloyalty, and ordered to remain
301
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
at Lambeth until the queen's pleasure was known. A com-
mission was appointed to enquire into his acts, and he was
ordered to appear at St. Paul's on August 27, bringing with
him an inventory of his goods.
Meantime Thornden, Bishop of Dover, took upon himself
to say the Latin mass at Canterbury Cathedral, though the
laws against it had not yet been repealed. The rumour got
abroad that he had done so by the archbishop's orders, and
that Cranmer himself had offered to say mass before the
queen. Cranmer at once prepared a written declaration in
which he violently repudiated this slander, and concluded by
offering to prove that the English Prayer Book and all the
doctrines set up by the late king were purer and more scrip-
tural than any that had been used in England for a thousand
years. This rash declaration was made public without his
knowledge, and on September 14, 1553, he was committed
to the Tower, where Bishops Ridley and Latimer were already
confined. In November, the archbishop was condemned for
treason along with Lady Jane Grey and her husband, Lord
Guildford Dudley. His life was spared, but the queen, who
could not forgive him for the part he had taken in the divorce
of her mother, Catherine of Aragon, had determined to
commit him to trial for heresy. In March 1554, he was
removed with Ridley and Latimer to Oxford, and was
sentenced to be tried before a papal commission. The pope
afterwards appointed Bishop Brooks, of Gloucester, to act
for him. Cranmer wrote to the queen, expressing regretful
surprise that his sovereign should desire him to be tried before
a foreign tribunal. On receiving his letter, Mary ordered
Cardinal Pole to reply to it.9
The trial did not commence until September, 1555. During
the eighteen months which intervened, Cranmer was confined
in the Bocardo prison at Oxford. Meantime the marriage of
Mary with Philip of Spain was celebrated, and the terrible
persecution of the Protestants began. Ridley and Latimer
were brought to the stake on October 16, 1555. Cranmer
was permitted to witness their death from the top of his prison
tower.
The condemnation of Cranmer after his trial was a foregone
' Strype's Memorials, II.
302
Thomas Cranmer
conclusion. The report of the trial was sent to Rome for
confirmation, and in December Pope Paul IV. declared the
archbishop to be excommunicated and deprived as a notorious
heretic, and ordered him to be handed over to the secular
power. A commission consisting of Bishops Bonner of London
andThirlby of Ely were chosen to perform the ceremony of his
degradation. He was first clothed in the vestments of a sub-
deacon, deacon, priest, bishop and archbishop, all on the top
of the other and all made of canvas and old clouts, with a mitre
and pall of the same stuff. After Bonner had addressed him
in insulting words, the bishops proceeded to strip him of the
vestments one by one, declaring him degraded from each office
in turn. A barber clipped his hair and the bishops scraped
the tips of his fingers where he had been anointed. He was
then degraded from the minor orders and dressed in the gown
of a poor yeoman with a townsman's cap on his head. As
Cranmer in this guise was led back to his prison, a com-
passionate gentleman from Gloucester restored to him his
own gown.10
The ceremony of his degradation took place on February 14,
1556. Soon afterwards his courage failed him, and he
was induced to sign no less than six declarations, re-
pudiating the doctrines of Luther and other reformers,
acknowledging all the doctrines of the Roman Church, and the
supremacy of the pope, and expressing deep regret for his past
career. This did not save him, for Mary had from the first
determined that he should die. March 21 was the day fixed
for his execution. It had been arranged that a sermon should
be preached at the stake by Dr. Cole, Provost of Eton, and that
Cranmer should afterwards read his recantations to the
assembled crowd. But the morning dawned wet , and Dr. Cole
preached to a crowded congregation in St. Mary's Church.
Cranmer was placed on a wooden platform by a pillar, where
he could be seen by all. During the sermon, which lasted
nearly two hours, Cranmer knelt in prayer, weeping abundantly.
At the close he was called upon to read his recantations.
He began by solemnly declaring that he believed all the
articles of the Christian Faith, and all that was taught by Holy
Scripture. He exhorted the people to love, charity, and
»° Foxe's Acts and Monuments, VIII., 80.
303
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
almsgiving, " And now I come," said he, " to the great thing
that so much troubleth my conscience, more than anything
I ever did or said in my whole life ; and this is the setting
abroad of a writing contrary to the truth which now here I
renounce and refuse as things written with my hand contrary
to the truth which I thought in my heart, written for fear of
death, and to save my life if it might be ; and that is all such
bills and papers which I have written or signed with my hand
since my degradation, wherein I have written many things
untrue. And forasmuch as my hand offended, writing con-
trary to my heart, my hand shall be first punished therefor,
for when I come to the fire it shall be first burned. As
for the pope, I refuse him as Christ's enemy and anti-Christ,
with all his false doctrine. As for the Sacrament, I believe
as I have taught in my book against the bishop of Winchester,
which my book teacheth so true a doctrine of the Sacra-
ment that it shall stand at the last day before the judgment
of God, when the papist doctrine contrary thereto shall be
ashamed to show her face."
Murmurs of amazement arose on all sides, and Dr. Cole
angrily ordered the bystanders to stop the heretic's mouth and
take him away. He was hurried violently from the church
to the place of execution, an iron chain was fixed round his
body, binding him to the stake, and the fire kindled. As the
fire mounted he was seen to hold his right hand in the flame,
and kept it there steadfastly save that once he removed it
to wipe his face. Often he was heard to repeat the words,
" This unworthy hand." There he stayed till life departed,
and died with extraordinary fortitude.
The many-sided character of Cranmer, the great archbishop
of the Reformation, is one of the most perplexing with which
history has to deal. For his weakness in pandering to the
sensual passions of the tyrant, King Henry, it is impossible
to exonerate him. Yet for his work as a scholar and theologian
the Anglican Church owes him the deepest gratitude. He
lived through one of the most difficult periods in the world's
history. He possessed a temperament which was singularly
timid, and which his long, solitary confinement tended further
to enfeeble. There can be little doubt that the recantations
were wrung from him by promises that his life would be
304
Thomas Cranmer
spared. Yet his final act of courage proves beyond doubt
that the cause for which he suffered was dear to his heart.
By his second wife, who survived him many years, Cranmer
left a son and two daughters.
Cranmer's principal writings are: (i) A Book on Henry
VIII. 's divorce, against marriage with a brother's widow.
(2) Preface to the Bible 1540. (3) " A Short Instruction
into Christian Religion " commonly called his " Catechism,"
translated from the Latin of Justus Jones. (4) A Preface to
the Book of Common Prayer. (5) " Answer to the Devonshire
Rebels " and aSermon on Rebellion. (6) "Reformatio Legum
Ecclesiasticarum." (7) "A Defence of the True and Catholic
Doctrine of the Sacrament." (8) "An Answer unto a Crafty
and Sophistical Cavillation devised by Stephen Gardiner,"
i.e., to Gardiner's reply to the preceding treatise. (9) "A
Confutation of Unwritten Verities," an answer to a treatise
of Dr. Richard Smith, maintaining that there were truths
necessary to be believed which were not expressed in
Scripture."
" James Gairdner, Art. on Archbishop Cranmer, Diet. Nat. Biog.
305
68.— REGINALD POLE, 1556 to 1558.
Queen of England : Mary I., 1553 to 1558.
Reginald Pole was born at Stourton Castle, Staffordshire,
in March 1500, and was the third son of Sir Reginald Pole,
Knight of the Garter, and Mary, daughter of George, Duke
of Clarence, brother of Edward IV. At the age of seven he
was sent to a grammar school founded by Colet, near the
Carthusian monastery of Sheen, in Surrey, where he remained
five years. He afterwards went to Magdalen College, Oxford,
where the famous humanists Thomas Linacre and William
Latimer were his tutors.
Henry VIII., who acknowledged Pole as a near kinsman,
contributed generously towards his education. In 1513,
Henry created Pole's widowed mother, Margaret, Countess
of Salisbury, and made her governess to the Princess Mary.
From an early age Pole seems to have been intended for the
Church, and while yet a layman in his teens benefices were
bestowed on him. These included a prebend in Salisbury
Cathedral, and the deanery of the collegiate church of Wim-
borne in Dorset. Throughout his career he showed a
preference for the studious life.
In 1521, he went at the king's expense1 to Padua to continue
his studies. There he came in contact with many of the
greatest scholars of the later Italian Renaissance, and formed
friendships which influenced his life. He also corresponded
with Erasmus and More. After vising Rome, Florence and
Venice, he was recalled to England in 1527, and made dean
of Exeter. The king determined to make use of his noble
kinsman for his own ends, and despatched him to Paris to
obtain the opinion of the university concerning the divorce.
Though when the question was first raised Pole seems to have
sided with the king, more careful consideration soon caused
him to change his mind. The judgment pronounced in
1 Wood Athena Oxon., Vol. I., p. 279.
306
CARDINAL POLE.
(From the original painting by Titian )
Reginald Pole
Henry's favour by the university of Paris was due not to Pole,
but to the influence of Francis I. After the death of Wolsey,
Pole was offered the archbishopric of York, or the see of
Winchester. He asked for a month to make up his mind, and
finally had a stormy interview with the king at York Place,
when he boldly denounced the divorce. Henry was so enraged,
that several times during the interview he laid his land on
his dagger.* The king, however, commanded him to put in
writing his opinions concerning the divorce. Pole drew up
a paper in which he condemned the reasoning of Henry's
supporters, and ended by imploring the king to refrain from
taking a step which would irretrievably defame his honour.
After reading this the king is said to have wavered in his
decision for some time.
In January 1532, Pole again obtained leave from the king
to go abroad to study theology. He resided for some
months at Avignon, but finding that the climate did not
agree with him, he returned to Padua. Meantime Henry
procured his divorce from Catherine and married Anne
Boleyn. The Emperor Charles V., who was deeply indignant
at the wrong done his aunt, Queen Catherine, is said at this
time to have favoured her project of marrying the Princess
Mary to Pole, and thus uniting the houses of Tudor and
York with a view to deposing Henry. There is no evidence,
however, that such a proposal was ever formally made to
Pole himself, though he was informed that the emperor
looked to him to redress the wrongs of the injured queen.
In 1535 King Henry, who still hoped to justify his actions
with respect to the divorce, sent orders to Pole to draw up a
treatise in reply to the two questions : (1) Is marriage with
a deceased brother's wife permissible by divine law ? (2) Is
papal supremacy a divine institution ? Pole's reply took
a year to write. It was intended for the king's eye alone,
but was published some years later under the little of " Pro
Unitate Ecclesise." In spite of the gratitude which Pole
owed to Henry for the many benefits conferred on him, he
felt that it was now his duty before God to speak plainly,
whatever might be the cost to himself and his family. The
floodgates of his bitter scorn for the king were at last opened,
s Ibid., p. 283.
307
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and in this treatise he denounces Henry in the most violent
language. " Thou hast cast thy kingdom into miserable
commotions and made it the spectacle of the world," he
wrote. " Thy butcheries and horrible executions have made
England the slaughter-house of innocence. The holiest and
most spotless men on earth have been slaughtered for new
crimes in the most ghastly and unspeakable manner. . .
In their bloody deaths no torment was spared them ; to
religion no insult. All nations wept to hear of that fearful
tragedy, and even now, after so long a time, when I write of
it tears burst from my eyes. And thou art he that argues
that the Pope cannot be the Vicar of Christ through moral
depravity ! Worse art thou than Korah who rebelled against
Aaron, worse than King Uzziah who usurped the priestly
office, worse than Saul who slew the priest at Nob. Lucifer
alone, who set himself against the Most High, may fitly be
compared to thee."
All hope of a compromise between Henry and Reginald
Pole was now at an end. The king, dissembling his wrath,
invited Pole to England on the pretext of discussing the
subject more fully, but he wisely refused the invitation. His
eldest brother, Lord Montague, and his mother, the Countess
of Salisbury, dreading the royal vengeance, denounced Reginald
as a traitor. Shortly after this he was summoned to Rome
by Pope Paul III., in order to take part in a commission for
the reform of the Church and the Roman curia. Pole was
received in Rome with much honour, and lodged in the Vatican.
He now took deacon's orders, and on December 22, 1536,
consented with some reluctance to accept the honour of being
created cardinal of St. Mary in Cosmedin.
Early in the following year, the pope sent him as legate to
Charles V. and Francis I., in the hope of persuading them to
unite to depose Henry. The mission failed, for the Emperor
and Francis mutually distrusted each other. On learning
that Pole was in French territory, Henry sent messengers
demanding his extradition. Though Francis I. refused to
deliver the cardinal to Henry's vengeance, he ordered him to
leave his dominions. Pole withdrew to Cambray, a neutral
place, and thence to Li^ge, where he lived for three months
under the protection of the cardinal-bishop. He was then
308
Reginald Pole
advised to return to Italy through Germany, as Henry VIII.
had hired emissaries to kidnap or assassinate him. Soon
after his return to Rome, Pole accompanied Pope Paul III.
to the meeting of Charles V. and Francis I. at Nice, and was
presented by the pope to the Emperor at the request of the
latter.3
In 1538, Paul III. published a bull in which he declared
Henry VIII. of England to be deposed and excommunicated,
and placed his kingdom under an interdict.
Towards the close of 1538, Pole undertook a mission to Spain
to urge Charles V. to assist the pope in launching the bull of
deposition against Henry. But his efforts were again fruit-
less. Meantime Pole's brother, Lord Montague, had been
beheaded on a charge of treason, and in 1539 an act of attainder
was passed against the cardinal and his family. Two years
later he received news of the execution of his aged mother,
the Countess of Salisbury. When the news reached him,
Pole told his secretary, Beccatelli, that he had received
good tidings. " I am now the son of a martyr ; we have one
more patron in heaven," he said.4
In the following August, Pole was appointed legate of the
district known as the Patrimony of St. Peter, of which the
capital is Viterbo. While there he was beloved for his mild
rule, and when two Englishmen were arrested who confessed
that'they had been sent to assassinate him, he refused to give
orders for their execution, and was content to send them for a
few days only to the galleys. At Viterbo many scholars
gathered around him, and the questions raised by the Re-
formation in Germany were freely discussed.
Pole's views with regard to the question of Justification by
Faith were regarded by strict Catholics as heretical, and he
was denounced to the Inquisition ; but no steps were taken
against him until a later period. In 1543, he was one of the three
papal legates sent to open the Council of Trent, but the meetings
were suspended, owing to the small attendance. When the
Council re-assembled in 1545, Pole was again appointed a
legate. Certain writers declare that when Luther's doctrine
of Justification by Faith was discussed, Pole pleaded illness as
8 Athena Oxon., I., 285
« Froude's Hist, of England, III., 286.
309
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
an excuse to withdraw from the Council, lest he should be
called on by the Catholic party to take part in an adverse
decree. This statement has, however, no evidence to support
it. When ill-health compelled Pole to withdraw to Padua,
he remained in frequent communication with the Council.
The draft of the decree on Justification was sent to him, and
his amendments accepted. His view appears to have been
that Justification is possible by a lively faith, which shows
itself in good works.
On the accession of Edward VI., Cardinal Pole was
excluded by name from the general pardon. He never-
theless hastened to send messengers and letters to
England, urging the government to treat with the apostolic
see. Though his messengers were courteously received, no
encouragement was given them, and Somerset's only reply was
to send Pole a copy of the English Book of Common Prayer.
On the death of Pope Paul III., on November 10, 1549,
Cardinal Pole was one of the candidates proposed for the
papal chair. At one time he had a majority of two-thirds of
the votes. Later this majority in his favour declined, and he
willingly consented to the election of Cardinal Del Monte,
who took the name of Julius III.
Among the fifteen demands made by the rebels of Devon
and Cornwall in 1549 (vide Cranmer), the twelfth was that
Cardinal Pole should be summoned to England and admitted
to the king's council.
In the spring of 1553, Pole withdrew to a Benedictine
monastery near Lake Garda, where he occupied himself in
literary work. While there news reached him of the
accession of Mary Tudor. Pope Julius III. immediately
appointed him legate to England, and Pole wrote to
the queen asking for permission to return to his native
country. This Mary would have willingly granted, but
the Emperor Charles V. fearing that Pole might place
obstacles in the way of the queen's marriage to his son
Philip, dissuaded her from granting the cardinal a safe con-
duct.5 There were also other difficulties in the way of his
return, for his attainder had not been reversed by parliament,
nor was England yet ripe to receive a papal legate. As the
6 Col. of State Papers, Foreign (i553"58)» P- 34-
310
Reginald Pole
English people were opposed to the Spanish match, it was
proposed by certain politicians that Pole should come to
England and marry Mary himself.
Another difficulty that arose to delay the reconciliation with
Rome was the question of the restoration of Church property,
which was now in secular hands. While these questions were
being discussed, the pope despatched Cardinal Pole on a
commission to establish friendly relations between Charles V.,
and Henry II. of France.
Shortly after the marriage of Philip and Mary, it was agreed
by the pope that the question of the restoration of Church
lands should remain in abeyance for the time being. The
parliament of November 1554 reversed Pole's attainder, and
two noblemen were sent to conduct him to England. On the
morning of November 20, Pole, who for more than twenty
years had been a wanderer and a fugitive from his native
land, sailed from Calais in the royal yacht. He was welcomed
at Dover by most of the nobility and clergy, and a great
company of gentlemen from all parts of the kingdom. At
Canterbury he was received with every demonstration of
respect and affectionate regard. At Rochester, in deference to
the royal command, he assumed the ancient pomp and in-
signia of a papal legate, the cross, two silver pillars and two
silver poleaxes being borne before him. Nothing could
exceed the warmth of his reception in London by the queen
and Philip.
On November 28, two days after his arrival in London, the
two Houses were summoned to Whitehall and addressed by
Pole in an impressive speech. His wanderings had left their
mark, for though only fifty-four, he presented the appearance
of a worn-out and prematurely aged man. He spoke in a low,
weak voice, audible only to those near him, and concluded
by stating that he held from the pope full powers of recon-
ciliation, but the grace of the apostolic see was to be
dependent upon the absolute revocation by parliament of
all the anti-papal acts.
On the following day, the Houses, completely submissive
to the will of the sovereign, sent a petition to Philip and Mary,
begging that they would intercede with Pole for the removal
of the interdict, and promising without delay to repeal all
3ii
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the anti-papal laws. On November 30, the members of both
Houses again assembled at the palace, and kneeling with the
king and queen before Cardinal Pole, received solemn absolu-
tion from the sin of schism. The queen and many others
sobbed aloud. The king, queen and parliament — the legate
leading — then went into the chapel of the palace, where the
Te Deum was sung, and Pole closed the scene with a benedic-
tion from the altar.6 Pole now became Mary's most trusted
counsellor in all spiritual matters.
On the death of Pope Julius III., Pole was again proposed
as a candidate for the papacy, and Philip and Mary used every
effort to secure his election, but without success. Immediately
after the deprivation of Cranmer, Pole was elected to the see
of Canterbury. Being still only in deacon's orders, he was
ordained a priest on March 20, 1556, in the church of the
Grey Friars, Greenwich. On the following day — that on
which Cranmer was burnt — he celebrated his first mass, and
on November 22, was consecrated archbishop, by Archbishop
Heath, Bishop Bonner, and five other bishops.
After the death of Gardiner, Pole was elected chancellor
of Cambridge University, and Oxford afterwards conferred on
him the same honour. There is no evidence to prove that
he was responsible for the terrible persecutions that have
blackened Mary's reign. It is recorded that three penitent
heretics obtained pardon on appealing to him as legate. Yet,
as Hook points out, it is practically certain that for one word
uttered by him the fires of Smithfield would have ceased to
blaze. He entered on his work of reform with much wisdom
and prudence. The clergy who had been ordained according
to the old Catholic rite were absolved and reinstated, while
those ordained by the new rite were regarded as laymen and
dismissed, their orders being held invalid.
Soon after the accession of Pope Paul IV., who as Cardinal
Caraffa had long been Pole's personal enemy, war broke out
between Philip and the apostolic see. Pole was deprived of his
legatine authority by a papal bull, dated June 14, 1557. The
old charge of heresy was revived against him, and he was
summoned to Rome.7
6 Froudes' Hist, of England. VI. 288.
7 Col. of State Papers, Foreign (i553-58)> PP- 3°7 *o 320.
312
Reginald Pole
Philip and Mary wrote remonstrating with the pope, who
relented sufficiently to permit Pole to retain the office of legatus
natus which was attached to the primacy. On learning that
a prison awaited her faithful counsellor if he proceeded to
Rome, Mary forbade the messenger with the papal summons
to land in England.
Pole died of double quartan ague at Lambeth on the evening
of November 17, 1558. His royal mistress, Queen Mary, had
passed away on the morning of the same day, and he lived long
enough to hear the shouts which welcomed the accession of
Queen Elizabeth. He died under the displeasure of the
apostolic see, to the cause of which he had faithfully devoted
his whole life. His deprivation of the legatine office, which
he prized far above the dignity of archbishop, had weighed
sorely on him and hastened his end. He was buried in
Canterbury Cathedral, near the spot where the shrine of
St. Thomas once stood.
Cardinal Pole was undoubtedly one of the most remarkable
figures of his age. Living in a corrupt time, and the adherent
of a corrupt cause, he nevertheless succeeded in winning the
respect of his opponents, many of whom write in praise of his
true piety and disinterestedness. " Seldom has any life been
animated by a more single-minded purpose," writes Gairdner.
He was generous and charitable in the administration of his
revenues, and had the gift of inspiring warm friendships.
Pole was described by his successor, Archbishop Parker,
as a man " of spare body, of a fresh complexion, with rather
a broad face, but with eyes which showed the gentleness
of his disposition."
313
69.— MATTHEW PARKER, 1559 to 1575.
Queen of England : Elizabeth, 1558 to 1603.
The success of Elizabeth's policy in the early part of her
reign was in a large measure due to a wise selection of those
whom she appointed to serve her in Church and State. It
would indeed have been difficult to find among the clergy of
England one more eminently fitted to steer the Church through
the difficult period which followed the death of Mary Tudor
than the prudent and moderate primate chosen to succeed
Cardinal Pole.
Matthew Parker, the eldest surviving son of William Parker,
a worsted weaver, and Alice Monins, his wife, was born at
Norwich, in the parish of St. Saviour, on August 6, 1504. His
father died about the year 1516, and his mother married a
certain John Baker, who proved a kind stepfather to Matthew
and his brothers. Matthew was sent to Cambridge, where he
was educated partly at St. Mary's Hostel and partly at
Corpus Christi College, graduating B.A. in 1525. In 1527,
he was ordained priest, and in the following year was elected
a fellow of his college. By devoting himself to the study of the
Scriptures and of the works of the early fathers, he attained a
high reputation for learning, and was one of the Cambridge
students invited by Wolsey to become a fellow in his newly
founded Cardinal College, (afterwards Christ Church), at
Oxford.1 But Parker refused to leave Cambridge, where he
had become associated with many of the leading reformers.
He was celebrated as an eloquent preacher, and in 1533 was
licensed by Archbishop Cranmer to preach in the southern
provinces. Two years later, he was appointed chaplain to
Anne Boleyn, and presented to the deanery of St. John the
Baptist's College at Stoke-by-Clare, in Suffolk. This college
had been originally founded as a cell of the famous monastery
of Bee {vide Lanfranc),but was now a college for the education
' Cooper's Athena Cantab., Vol. II.
314
Matthew Parker
of secular priests. Under the judicious government of Parker
the college prospered greatly.3 In 1537, he was appointed
chaplain to Henry VIII.
About the year 1539, Parker was denounced as a heretic to
the Lord Chancellor Audley, by George Colet, and others of the
town of Clare who charged him with having ridiculed the
ceremonies of Easter and denied the holiness of the cross. The
Lord Chancellor supported him, however, and dismissed the
case as frivolous. His preferments included a prebend at
Ely, the rectory of Ashdon,in Essex, to which he was presented
by Stoke College, the rectory of Burlingham, in Norfolk, and
the mastership of Corpus Christi College Cambridge, (1544).
During his tenure of the latter office, he showed much energy
and conscientiousness in the discharge of his duties. He
caused a complete inventory to be taken of the goods of the
college, instituted inspections every three years, restored order
in the finances, and ordered his secretary, John Josselin, to
prepare a history of the college.
In 1545, he was elected vice-chancellor of the university,
and was soon afterwards severely censured by the chancellor
Gardiner for permitting the students to perform a play
" Pammachus," in which the old ecclesiastical system was
derided.3 On the suppression of Stoke College, Parker
received an annual pension equivalent to £400 in present
currency. This enabled him to marry Margaret Harlestone,
the daughter of a Norfolk squire, a lady to whom lie had long
been attached. She proved an excellent and devoted wife.
During Rett's rebellion, Dr. Parker, who happened to be
in Norfolk, ventured at the risk of his life to enter the rebels'
camp to remonstate with them, but appears to have produced
little effect on the leaders. He continued to enjoy the royal
favour during the reign of Edward VI., by whom he was made
dean of Lincoln.
Parker espoused the cause of Lady Jane Grey and enter-
tained Northumberland to supper at Cambridge, when the
Duke marched northward with his army. On the accession
of Mary, Parker was deprived of all his preferments, and
though he did not leave England, remained in hiding
during the five years of her reign. He was frequently
1 Ibid. 3 Strype's Life of Parker, Vol. I. p. 37.
315
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
forced to change his abode, lest he should be discovered,
and denounced as a heretic. One night, when fleeing
from those who sought his life, he fell from his horse, and
sustained injuries from the effects of which he never wholly
recovered.4
Shortly after the accession of Queen Elizabeth he was
summoned to court by Cecil, but petitioned that he might
receive some minor preferment only, and be permitted to
continue his studies. On hearing that he was designed for the
archbishopric of Canterbury, he earnestly pleaded his
incapacity through ill-health and other deficiences as a reason
for declining the office. But he pleaded in vain, for Eliazabeth
required a moderate man of sound common-sense, and this
she found in Matthew Parker.
His election took place in August 1559, but some difficulty
arose in finding bishops willing and qualified to consecrate him.
It was not until December 17 that the ceremony was per-
formed at Lambeth by Barlow, Bishop-elect of Chichester,
Scory, Bishop-elect of Hereford, Coverdale, late Bishop of
Exeter, and Hodgkins, suffragan Bishop of Bedford. Parker
afterwards caused a full account of his consecration to be
drawn up and preserved. The story that he received an
indecent consecration at the Nag's Head Tavern in Fleet
Street appears to have been fabricated forty-five years later
by a Jesuit writer.
Before the election of Parker, parliament had passed
the Supremacy Act, which restored "to the crown the ancient
jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical," and Elizabeth
took the title not of Head but of Supreme Governor of the
National Church. An Act of Uniformity was also passed
requiring that the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI., in
which several important alterations had been made, should be
used, with the same form of service in every church.
Archbishop Parker's task was no easy one, for he was
expected to steer the bark of the Church between the extremes
of Calvinism on the one hand and Roman Catholicism on the
other. Though he possessed little originality, he had a strong
respect for law and order. Not the least of his difficulties
arose through the queen herself, who was at this time feeling
• Ibid., p. 69.
3l6
Matthew Parker
her way and who adopted a policy of astute vacillation with
regard to ecclesiastical matters. While she insisted on uni-
formity in matters of ritual, she objected to definitions of
doctrine. Parker took in hand the reform of the Church
Calendar. He restored forty-eight minor festivals, known as
the " Black Letter Days," which had been omitted in the
Second Prayer Book of Edward VI. He also reduced the
Forty-two Articles of Religion to Thirty-nine, and required
that all who were admitted to holy orders or as graduates of
Oxford or Cambridge should subscribe to them.
An important work of Parker's primacy was the prepara-
tion of a new English version of the Scriptures known as the
Bishops' Bible. On this work, which occupied four years,
he employed fourteen eminent scholars, of whom eight were
bishops. The archbishop edited the whole, and was himself
responsible for the translation of certain of the books in the
Old and New Testament. Copies of the Bishops' Bible were
placed in all the cathedral churches, but its great size and cost
rendered it almost inaccessible to private individuals.
In 1566 Archbishop Parker issued a series of enactments
known as the " Advertisements," the purpose of which was to
put an end to diversity of ritual in public worship, and also to
regulate the apparel of ecclesiastical persons. These decrees
involved him in controversy with different parties, and
deplorable disputes arose with regard to vestments, the use
of the white surplice serving as a special bone of contention.
In February 1570, Pope Pius V. issued his famous bull
Regnans in Excelsis, in which he excommunicated Queen
Elizabeth and released all her subjects from their allegiance
to her. This rendered loyalty to the pope treason to the
queen, and the persecution of papists which followed was due
not to religious but to political motives. After the massacre
of St. Bartholomew in August 1572, Parker is said to have
counselled the execution of Mary Queen of Scots, in whom
many of the papist plots found their centre. Catholic bishops
who had been deprived of their sees were frequently committed
to Parker's custody, and were treated by him with much
kindness and consideration.5
Archbishop Parker and his excellent wife were much givep
s Ibid., p. 71.
317
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to hospitality, and gave splendid entertainments to the citizens
of Canterbury.6 More than once Queen Elizabeth visited
them at Canterbury, and was royally entertained. The queen
had a great dislike for clerical marriages. On one occasion
when taking leave of the archbishop after she had been
entertained by him, she turned to his wife and said, " Madam
I may not call you, Mistress I am ashamed to call you, never-
theless I thank you." Mrs. Parker died in 1570.
During the last three years of his life Parker's relations with
the queen became less cordial owing to his failure to put down
nonconformity. He also incurred the enmity of the Earl of
Leicester, the queen's favourite. In March 1575, his health
began to decline, and he died at Lambeth from an attack of
the stone on May 17. He was buried in his private chapel
at Lambeth. His monument was demolished in 1648 by order
of Colonel Scott the regicide, and his remains were dug up
and deposited under a dunghill. After the Restoration, Arch-
bishop Sancroft caused them to be restored to their original
resting place.7
Parker was the generous patron of scholars. He
maintained at Lambeth an establishment of printers,
transcribers and engravers. A large number of his letters,
treatises and sermons are extant. His most important work,
"De Antiquitate Britannicae Ecclesiae," gives an account of his
predecessors from the time of St. Augustine, and concludes
with a brief autobiography. His translation of the Psalms
into English metre was the work of his Marian retirement. His
historical research is exemplified in his editions of the
chronicles of Asser, Walsingham, and the compiler known as
Matthew of Westminster. Parker was a generous benefactor
to the Church and to the university of Cambridge. He
bequeathed to the library of Corpus Christi College a collec-
tion of over fifty manuscripts of the highest historical value.
The most interesting of these is said to be one of the volumes
which Pope Gregory the Great sent from Rome, for the use
of St. Augustine of Canterbury (q.v.).
At Cambridge, Parker caused to be constructed at his own
expense the Regent's Walk, which led from the west end of
Great St. Mary's Church to the schools and library. He
6 Ibid., Vol. II., p. 19. » Ibid., p. 435.
3i8
Matthew Parker
founded scholarships at Corpus Christi, Caius and Trinity
Colleges, Cambridge, and made provision for the poor of
Norwich, of Mattishall, the birthplace of his wife, and of
Lambeth and Croydon. He also founded a grammar school
at Rochdale, in Lancashire.8
He is described as a man of singularly modest demeanour,
much given to study, meditation, prayer and religious exer-
cises. The sobriety of his judgment and the purity of his
morals rendered him well fitted to preside over the Church in
that stormy period. Though unable to reduce the conflicting
elements to rest, his wise policy did much to preserve the
continuity of the English Church with the Catholic Church of
antiquity.
8 Athena Cantab., Vol. II.
319
70.— EDMUND GRINDAL, 1576-1583.
Queen of England : Elizabeth, 1558 to 1603.
After the death of Archbishop Parker, the see of Canterbury
remained vacant for nearly six months. Meantime the con-
stant danger to Church and State from Popish plots had given
rise to a Puritan reaction, which affected even the queen
herself. The election to the archbishopric of Edmund Grindal,
who was known to possess a strong Puritan bias, appears
to have been due to the influence of Elizabeth's most trusted
minister, Cecil.
Edmund, the son of William Grindal, a well-to-do farmer,
was born about the year 1519, at Hensingham, in the parish
of St. Bees, Cumberland. At an early age he became devoted
to study. There is a story that one evening, when he was
walking in the fields near his home, an arrow accidentally
struck a book which he carried in his breast, and which was
thus the means of preserving his life. Edwin Sandys, who
afterwards succeeded Grindal in the sees of London and York,
was a native of the same parish of St. Bees, and an intimate
friend of Grindal's youth.1
Edmund proceeded in due course to Magdalen College,
Cambridge, whence he removed to Christ's College, and
ultimately to Pembroke Hall, where he graduated B.A. in
1538, M.A. in 1541, and B.D. in 1549. In 1541 he was
elected a fellow of Pembroke Hall, and in 1549 became master
of his college. By this time he had associated himself with the
reformers, and in the latter year was selected out of the whole
university as one of the four disputants against the doctrine
of transubstantiation, at a public conference held before
King Edward's commissioners. Shortly before this he had
taken holy orders, and in 1550, became chaplain to Ridley,
Bishop of London, who appointed him precentor at St.
Paul's and a canon of Westminster. In the following year
1 Introd. to Remains of Edmund Grindal (Parker Soc).
320
Edmund Grindal
he was chosen chaplain to King Edward VI., at a yearly
salary of £40.
On the accession of Mary, Grindal fled to Germany, and for
the next five years resided chiefly at Strasburg, also
visiting Wasselheim, Speyer and Frankfort. In Germany
he came in contact with many famous reformers, and attended
the lectures of Peter Martyr, whose friendship greatly in-
fluenced his later life. One of his employments during his
exile, was to collect histories of the martyrs of Mary's reign.
These he afterwards communicated to John Foxe, who
incorporated them in his " Acts and Monuments." In
1554, when dissension broke out among the English reformers
at Frankfort, Grindal proceeded thither, and strove to allay
their disputes.3
On the accession of Elizabeth, Grindal returned to England,
and was soon marked out for high preferment in the Church.
On his nomination to the see of London in 1559, his misgivings
with regard to the queen's use of crucifixes and certain cere-
monies retained by Archbishop Parker caused him to hesitate
to accept office. He wrote to Peter Martyr asking his advice,
but Martyr advised him not to decline a bishopric on account
of these scruples. He was accordingly consecrated at Lambeth
in December 1559, but submitted only with the greatest
reluctance to wear episcopal dress. As bishop of London,
he was expected to suppress nonconformity with a strong hand,
but his leanings towards Calvinism made the task more
difficult. While subjecting the nonconformists to fines he
admitted that he sympathized with their scruples, thus
adopting an attitude which weakened his authority.
In 1561, St. Paul's Cathedral was partially destroyed by
lightning. Bishop Grindal generously contributed the large
sum of 1,200 pounds for its repair, and induced his clergy
to lend their aid for the same purpose.3 As his position with
regard to the nonconformists became increasingly difficult,
Parker recommended his translation to the archbishopric of
York, to which he was confirmed in 1570. There he found
himself in his element, for he had to deal chiefly with Catholic
recusants. Grindal organized a metropolitan visitation of his
province, and laboured to suppress the popular superstitions
1 Ibid. * Strype's Life of Grindal, p. 93.
321
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and popish practices which still prevailed in the north. He
succeeded in reducing considerably the number of papists in
his province.
In January 1576, Grindal was translated to the see of
Canterbury. Cecil had induced Elizabeth to consent to his
appointment, for it was felt that the safety of the queen and
her government would be best assured by securing the loyal
support of the Puritan reformers.
Shortly after his promotion to Canterbury, Grindal had the
misfortune to fall under the queen's displeasure. At that time
the practice prevailed in many districts of holding " prophesy-
ings " a name given to meetings of the clergy at which particular
portions of the scriptures were explained and discussed.
Grindal approved of these exercises, and drew up careful
rules for their management. There can be little doubt
that such meetings were frequently used to propagate non-
conformity and discontent. Queen Elizabeth, to whom the
" prophesyings " were peculiarly hateful, gave orders to
Grindal that they should be stopped. She also declared
that there were too many preachers in the country, and
that two or three were sufficient for each county.*
Grindal addressed to the queen an able and eloquent letter,
in which he humbly urged that the "prophesyings" were
profitable to the Church, and that it was therefore expedient
they should be continued. He strongly advised her to
refer all disputes concerning ecclesiastical matters to bishops
and divines, and declared that in matters of faith and religion
it was not fitting that she should pronounce so resolutely and
peremptorily as in civil matters. This letter greatly incensed
the queen. In 1577, the archbishop was summoned before
the lords in the Star Chamber, and refusing to submit, was
suspended from the exercise of his episcopal functions. After
six months he was again permitted to consecrate bishops, but
his ecclesiastical jurisdiction was not restored. Meantime
his duties were delegated to his vicar-generals. At the
convocation which met at St. Paul's in June 1580, certain
of the members were so affected by the disgrace of the primate,
that they refused to enter on any business or to grant a subsidy
till he was reinstated. The majority were too fearful of the
4 Introd. to Remains.
322
Edmund Grindal
royal displeasue to adopt this suggestion, but it was unani-
mously agreed to petition the queen for Grindal's reinstate-
ment. The archbishop submitted a written declaration, in
which he expressed his sorrow for having offended Her Majesty,
and stated that his refusal to execute her commands was due
to scruples of conscience only.
His suspension appears to have been entirely removed about
the close of 1582, but he never recovered from his disgrace.
Early in 1583, his health failed, and he was attacked by
cataract in the eyes. He petitioned the queen for permission
to resign the archbishopric, and arrangements were made for
his doing so.5 Elizabeth offered the primacy toWhitgift,
Bishop of Worcester, but he declined to accept it, as long as
Grindal lived. A suitable pension was assigned to him and
other matters settled with regard to his resignation, which,
however, had not been actually tendered when he died at
Croydon on July 6, 1583. He was buried in Croydon Church.
Grindal had remained unmarried, but died poor, for his
charities were boundless. He founded a grammar school at
St. Bees, in Cumberland, and left funds for scholarships at
Pembroke Hall, Magdalen and Christ's College, Cambridge,
and for a fellowship at Queen's College, Oxford. He was
also a generous benefactor to the poor, and a patron of
musicians. His writings consist almost entirely of occasional
pieces, special sermons, episcopal injunctions and letters.
Most of these have been collected in the " Remains of Arch-
bishop Grindal," edited by W. Nicholson for the Parker
Society.
In the weakness and vacillation of his character, Grindal
presents a striking contrast to his predecessor, Archbishop
Parker. There are many evidences, however, of his sincere
piety and disinterestedness, and to the latter quality the
ineffectiveness of his primacy was chiefly due.
Edmund Spenser in his " Shepherd's Calendar " celebrates
Grindal under the name of " Algrind."
s Strype's Life of Grindal, p. 411.
323
7i.— JOHN WHITGIFT, 1583 to 1604.
Sovereigns of England : Elizabeth, 1558 to 1603.
James I., 1603 to 1625.
John Whitgift, who was descended from an old Yorkshire
family, was born at Great Grimsby, in Lincolnshire, about
the year 1530. His grandfather, John Whitgift, had two
sons, Henry and Robert, and a daughter, Isabel. Robert be-
came abbot of the Augustinian monastery of Wellow, near
Grimsby ; Isabel married Michael Shaller, the verger of St.
Paul's Cathedral ; while Henry settled as a merchant at
Grimsby, marrying Anne Dynewell, by whom he had six sons,
the eldest being John, the future archbishop, and one daughter.1
On the advice of his uncle, the Abbot Robert, from whom he
received his early education, John was sent to London, to the
famous St. Anthony's school between Broad Street and Thread-
needle Street. While attending this school he lodged with
his aunt, a bigoted papist, who lived in St. Paul's Churchyard.
The Abbot Robert had influenced his nephew in favour of
the reformer's doctrines, and John refused to accompany his
aunt to mass. A quarrel arose between them and resulted in
John's being driven from his aunt's house. On parting with
him, she declared that at first she thought she had received
a saint into her house, but now perceived he was a devil.
John returned to his home at Great Grimsby, but in 1549
matriculated at Queen's College, Cambridge. In the following
year he removed to Pembroke Hall, where Nicholas Ridley,
afterwards Bishop of London, was Master, and where John
Bradford, another famous reformer and martyr, was his first
tutor. In 1555, Whitgift was chosen a fellow of Peterhouse,
and in the following year took the degree of M.A., proceeding
to that of B.D. in 1563, and D.D. in 1569. Dr. Perne, the
Master of Peterhouse, showed Whitgift much kindness during
1 Rev. H. J. Clayton, Archbishop Whitgift, p. 11.
324
.,•/.->,-».-
ARCHBISHOP WHITGIFT.
John Whitgift
an illness, and, knowing his views, screened him from commis-
sioners sent by Cardinal Pole to examine the University.
Shortly after the accession of Queen Elizabeth, Whitgift
took holy orders, and was appointed chaplain to Dr. Cox,
Bishop of Ely, a returned exile, who collated him to the rectory
of Teversham, in Cambridgeshire. Whitgift's first sermon,
preached at the church of Great St. Mary, Cambridge, from the
text " I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ," established
his reputation as a preacher of great eloquence. He was
appointed successively, Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity,
Master of Pembroke Hall, Master of Trinity College and
Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge.
His fame as a preacher having reached the court, he was
invited to preach before Queen Elizabeth, who was so favour-
ably impressed that she called him her " Whitegift,"2 and
immediately appointed him one of her chaplains. In 1570,
he was elected vice-chancellor of Cambridge University, and
in this capacity became involved in a controversy with the
Puritan leader, Thomas Cartwright, whom he expelled from his
fellowship at Trinity for preaching resistance to the Act of
Uniformity. Cartwright retired to Germany, but returned
in the following year, and presented to the House of Commons
two addresses called " Admonitions to Parliament," both
breathing a spirit of haughty defiance against episcopacy.
Whitgift prepared able replies to the admonitions, but the
controversy continued to rage for many years. Before his
death, Whitgift became reconciled to his old opponent, and
is said to have shown him much kindness.
In 1577, Whitgift was consecrated bishop of Worcester,
by Archbishop Grindal assisted by the bishops of London,
Winchester and Chichester. He was also nominated vice-
president of the Marches of Wales during the absence of the
president, Sir Henry Sidney, in Ireland. In the discharge of
the duties connected with the latter office, he displayed
remarkable energy.3
While bishop of Worcester he was specially popular among
the gentry of the district, and succeeded in putting an end to
a feud of long standing between Sir John Russell and Sir
2 Sir John Paul, Life of Whitgift, p. 25.
3 Cooper's Athena Cantab., II., 369.
325
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Henry Berkeley, two neighbouring magnates. The story is
that Russell and Berkeley arrived in Worcester each at the
head of a band of armed followers. It was expected that a
battle would take place, but Bishop Whitgift ordered the
leaders to be arrested and brought before him. For two
hours he discussed with them the grounds of their quarrel,
with the result that they left his house as friends. He appears
to have shown great boldness at this time in admonishing
Queen Elizabeth and her favourite Leicester, for misappro-
priation of ecclesiastical revenues. He even warned the
queen that her future safety depended on the security she
gave to the property of the Church.
On August 14, 1583, he succeeded Grindal as arch-
bishop of Canterbury. Elizabeth found in Whitgift a
man after her own heart, for he delighted in gorgeous
ceremonies and hated the Puritans. The fact that he
was unmarried also won for him the favour of the queen,
who was a strong advocate of the celibacy of the clergy.
Like Elizabeth, he held episcopacy to be essential to the
existence of the Church, and did not scruple to employ the
harshest measures to enforce uniformity. One of his first
acts after he became primate was to draw up a series of articles
to which he required all clergy to subscribe before ordination,
affirming the Royal Supremacy, the Act of Uniformity, and
the Thirty-nine Articles. He also required certain of the
clergy who had been already ordained to reply to twenty-four
searching questions on pain of deprivation. An outcry was
raised that the Inquisition was being introduced into England,
and Whitgift was nicknamed the " Pope of Lambeth." Cecil
(Lord Burleigh), and the Earl of Leicester, who sympathized
with the Puritans, urged him to show greater moderation.
He, however, insisted in resorting to the severest measures,
and several nonconformists were executed.4
In 1586, Archbishop Whitgift was appointed a member of
the privy council, and in the following year was offered the
lord chancellorship, but declined it. After the defeat of the
Spanish Armada the patriotic feeling aroused tended to
strengthen Elizabeth's policy for establishing a national
Church. The queen approved an act which decreed the
* Cat. of State Papers (1591-1594), 75 to 151.
326
John Whitgift
punishment of those convicted of attending unauthorized
places of worship. The feelings of many of the Puritans
continued as bitter as ever, and about the year 1593 certain
notorious tracts appeared under the name of Martin Marpre-
late. In these lampoons coarse and indecent attacks were
made on the queen and the primate, and on all holding
prominent positions in Church or State. The chief aim of
these writings was to heap ridicule on the episcopate. It
is generally believed that the libels originated with a young
Welshman named Penry, who was arrested and executed
along with some of his accomplices. The tracts were
published by means of a movable press, which the libellers
carried with them from place to place.
In his latter years, Archbishop Whitgift seems to have been
desirous of showing that he was in complete agreement with
such portions of the Calvinistic doctrines as did not treat of
ritual or discipline. He convened a meeting of the clergy at
Lambeth, and drew up the celebrated " Lambeth Articles."
They affirmed the doctrines of election and predestination,
asserted that God has from eternity fore-ordained some
to life, and hath reprobated others unto death, and that it is
not in the power of every man to be saved. Both the queen
and Lord Burghley strongly condemned the articles, which
were accordingly suppressed. They were approved by the
Puritans, who at the Hampton Court Conference in 1604
requested that they should be incorporated in the book of the
Thirty-nine Articles ; the suggestion was, however, rejected.
It is related of Archbishop Whitgift that he delighted to
travel in state with a great retinue, which was increased by
the gentlemen and clergy of the country, so that he some-
times rode into Canterbury and other towns with 1,000
horsemen.
Whitgift proved a true and firm friend to Hooker, the author
of "Ecclesiastical Polity," and supported him against his
opponent Travers, the leader of the Presbyterians. Hooker
was presented by Whitgift to the living of Boscombe, near
Salisbury.
At the time of the rebellion of Essex, Whitgift sent
an armed retinue to protect the queen, and his men were
the first to force their way into the house of the unfortunate
327
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
earl on the occasion of his capture. The archbishop attended
Elizabeth on her death bed, and was present when the
great and lonely queen breathed her last at Richmond on
March 24, 1603. He survived her barely a year. He crowned
James I., and was present at the Hampton Court Conference
in January 1604, but the chief conduct of it was in the hands
of Bancroft, Bishop of London, who for some time had acted as
deputy to the aged primate.5 In February Whitgift caught
cold, while on a journey from Lambeth to Fulham in his
barge, but a few days later repaired to Whitehall to dine
with the king. While waiting in the council chamber he was
suddenly struck down by paralysis, and was conveyed back
to Lambeth in an unconscious condition.
King James visited him, sat for some time by his bedside,
and assured him that he would pray earnestly for his recovery.
Whitgift attempted to address the king in Latin, but could
only articulate " Pro Ecclesia Dei" These words he repeated
several times.6 He died on February 29, 1604, and was buried,
as he had desired, in Croydon Church.
Whitgift is described as a man of middle stature, of grave
countenance, of brown complexion, black hair and eyes ;
he wore his beard neither long nor thick.7 He was a benefactor
to Pembroke Hall and to Trinity College, Cambridge. He
founded at Croydon a hospital or almshouse, which still exists,
dedicated to the Holy Trinity, for the reception of at least
thirty poor persons of both sexes, and so many more up to
thirty-nine in all as the revenues might be sufficient to support.
These he visited so frequently that he knew their names and
dispositions, and called them his " brothers and sisters,"
Rooms were reserved in the hospital for the founder, who would
sometimes make use of its quietness and peace, retiring thither
for a few days at a time, and sharing the table of the inmates.8
To the almshouses was attached a school now known as the
Whitgift Grammar School. This establishment was placed
under a schoolmaster, who was required to be a parson, learned
in the Greek and Latin tongue, and whose stipend was £20
5 Strype's Life of Whitgift, II., p. 519 and ff.
6 Sir. Geo. Paul's Life.
7 Ibid.
8 Rev. H. J. Clayton, Archbishop Whitgift, p. 131.
328
John Whitgift
a year. The hospital and chapel were dedicated on July 9
and 10, 1599.
A considerable number of Whitgift's works have been
collected and printed by the Parker Society. They consist
chiefly of controversial tracts, treatises and letters.
329
22
72.— RICHARD BANCROFT, 1604 to 1610.
King of England : James I., 1603 to 1625.
Richard, the son of John Bancroft, gentleman, and Mary
Curwen, his wife, was born at Farn worth, in Lancashire, in the
year 1544. His mother was the niece of Dr. Hugh Curwen,
Archbishop of Dublin, at whose expense Richard received his
education at Christ's College, Cambridge. After taking his
degree of B.A., he migrated to Jesus College, where he con-
tinued his studies, graduating M.A. in 1570. Soon after his
ordination he became chaplain to Dr. Cox, Bishop of Ely, who
collated him to the rectory of Teversham in Cambridgeshire.
The eloquence of his sermons soon attracted attention, and he
was appointed one of the preachers to the university of Cam-
bridge. In 1580 he was admitted B.D., and D.D., in 1585.
His preferments included the rectory of St. Andrew's Holborn,
the treasureship of St. Paul's, the rectory of Cottingham in
Northamptonshire and prebends in the cathedrals of St. Paul's,
Westminster and Canterbury. During the later years of
Elizabeth's reign he distinguished himself as a vigorous
opponent of the Puritan party, and published several able
treatises in disparagement of their views.
On February 9, 1589, Bancroft preached a sermon at St.
Paul's Cross in which he maintained the superiority of the
Episcopal order to that of the Presbyterian, and declared
episcopacy to be of divine origin. This greatly offended
the Scottish clergy, who threatened to appeal against him
to the queen.1 In 1592 he became chaplain to Archbishop
Whitgift, whose trusted supporter he remained until the death
of the primate. Through Whitgift's influence he was elected
to the see of London in 1597. Soon after his consecration, he
spent 1 ,000 pounds on the repair of his palace at Fulham. In
1600 Elizabeth employed Bancroft with others on an embassy
1 Cooper's Athenoe Cantab., III., 28.
330
Richard Bancroft
to Embden, to put an end to the disputes between the English
and Danes, but the mission proved a failure.2
After the accession of James I., Bancroft took a prominent
part in the Hampton Court Conference, acting as deputy to
the aged primate. He zealously asserted the divine right of
episcopacy, expressed himself with much venom against the
Puritans, and gave way to violent outbursts of temper. James
refused to grant any of the demands made by the Puritan
party, and frequently reiterated his famous maxim, " No
bishop ; no king." The conference had little result, except
that it was agreed to prepare a new English version of the Bible,
still known as the Authorised Version.
In October 1604, Bancroft was elected to the see of Canter-
bury in succession to Archbishop Whitgift, and in the same
year was sworn a privy councillor at Hampton Court.3 One of
his first acts after his elevation to the primacy was to draw up
a series of articles protesting against the interference of the
civil judges in the ecclesiastical courts. The judges under
the leadership of the famous Lord Coke maintained their
cause against the bishops, declaring that the administration
of law in the ecclesiastical courts was such that even in
ecclesiastical matters many men preferred to have recourse
to the king's courts.
After the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot the laws against
Catholics were made more stringent. The archbishop is said
to have gradually relaxed the severity of these laws,
and was consequently accused of being a Papist. He
encouraged discussions between the secular clergy and the
Jesuits, and furnished some of the former with material to
write against their adversaries. Towards the Puritans he
showed no indulgence, and during his primacy nearly three
hundred clergy were deprived of their livings.
In November 1606, Andrew Melville, the famous Scottish
divine, was cited before the privy council for having in a Latin
epigram reflected on the services in the chapel royal. After
being addressed by Archbishop Bancroft, Melville took occa-
sion to tell his mind plainly before the council. He imputed
to the archbishop all the corruptions, superstitions, profana-
tions of the Sabbath day, the imprisoning of faithful preachers,
2 Biog. Brit., I., 577. * Ibid.
331
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and other evils by which the Church had been vexed. Then
taking Bancroft by the sleeves of his rochet, and shaking them
violently, he called them " Romish rags and part of the Beast's
mark." He further declared that he held the archbishop to be
the chief enemy of all reformed Churches in Europe, and was
grieved to the heart to see such a man have the king's ear,
and sit so high in the honourable council of England.*
In April 1608, Bancroft was appointed chancellor of the
university of Oxford. He soon afterwards instituted
a scheme for the better maintenance of the clergy, but
was forced to abandon it. A letter written by him to the
clergy shortly before his death shows that he was most anxious
to remedy existing abuses such as the holding of pluralities,
and unnecessary luxury. He also attempted to further a
scheme for building a college at Chelsea for the training of
students who should answer all controversial writings against
the Church of England.5 The idea had originated with Dr.
Sutcliffe, Dean of Exeter, who had bequeathed lands and money
to establish such an institution. But the Church did not take
up the design cordially, and it was gradually abandoned.
Archbishop Bancroft died at Lambeth, after suffering
excruciating torments from stone, on November 2, 1610.
He was buried in Lambeth chapel. To Bancroft is due
the institution of Lambeth Palace Library. He bequeathed
to his successors, the archbishops, a valuable collection of
books which were removed to Cambridge in the time of
Cromwell, but were restored to Archbishop Sheldon in 1666.
This collection afterwards become a permanent possession of
the see of Canterbury. Bancroft's writings, which consist
chiefly of controversial treatises, prove that he possessed
considerable learning and ability.
■» Athena Cantab., III., 31.
s Biog. Brit., I., 580.
332
73— GEORGE ABBOT, 1611 to 1633.
Kings of England : James I., 1603 to 1625.
Charles I., 1625 to 1649.
On the death of Archbishop Bancroft it was earnestly desired
by the bishops of the province that Lancelot Andrewes, the
saintly and beloved bishop of Ely, should be appointed to
the see of Canterbury. But the king's choice fell on
George Abbot, a much less eminent man, who had recently
been translated from the see of Coventry and Lichfield to that
of London, and who had apparently won the royal favour by
his success in reconciling the Scots to the idea of episcopacy.
George Abbot was born at Guildford, in Surrey, on October
29, 1562, and was the son of Maurice Abbot, a clothworker,
and his wife, Alice March. These worthy people had embraced
Protestantism in the reign of Edward VI., and on this account
had narrowly escaped the faggot under Mary. They had a
family of six sons, of whom George was the second. The
eldest, Robert, became bishop of Salisbury, and the youngest,
Maurice, became Lord Mayor of London. The cottage in
which the future archbishop was born was close by the
bridge that crosses the river Wye, and remained standing
until 1864. Shortly before George's birth his mother had a
curious dream. She imagined she was told in her sleep that
if she would eat a jack or pike the child she went with
would prove a son and would rise to great honour. Not
long afterwards, on taking a pail of water out of the river
which ran by the house, she accidentally caught a jack
and had thus an odd opportunity of fulfilling her dream.
This story being noised abroad, certain persons of distinction
offered to become sponsors for the child, and by means of their
assistance George received an excellent education.1
From the grammar school at Guildford George proceeded,
at the age of sixteen, to Balliol College, Oxford, and took the
' Biog. Brit., VoL I., p. 5.
333
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
degree of B.A. in 1582, afterwards proceeding to those of
M.A. in 1585, B.D. in 1593, and D.D. in 1597. In 1583 he
was elected a probationer fellow of his college. After taking
holy orders at the age of twenty-four, he was elected a
preacher in the university, and soon gained a reputation for
eloquence. His lectures on the Book of Jonah, which are
extant, attracted crowds of hearers.2 About the year 1592,
he became chaplain to Lord Buckhurst the famous Puritan
leader.
From his parents 'Abbot had inherited a strong Puritan
bias which showed itself throughout his career in a somewhat
narrow and intolerant spirit. At Oxford he became known
as a leader of the Calvinists. In 1597, he was appointed
master of University College, and in 1600 vice-chancellor of
the university. While holding this office he came into
conflict with Laud, who was then one of the proctors of the
university, and to whose views he was bitterly opposed. In
1611, when Laud was appointed president of St. John's College,
Abbot vainly endeavoured to have the election cancelled.
In 1599, Abbot was installed dean of Winchester. He took
part in the Hampton Court Conference, and was one of the
divines appointed by James I. to prepare the authorized version
of the Scriptures. Having been appointed chaplain to the Earl
of Dunbar, Treasurer of Scotland, Abbot accompanied the
earl to Scotland in 1609 to assist him in carrying out King
James's project for the restoration of episcopacy in that
country. Abbot seems to have found favour with the Scots,
who perceived that his religious views differed little from their
own. In 1610, bishops were consecrated to the sees of Glasgow,
Brechin and Galloway.3
During his stay in Scotland Abbot was present at the trial
and execution of George Sprot, a notary of Aymouth, who had
been concerned in the Gowrie Conspiracy. Abbot afterwards
published an account of the trial in which he took occasion
to eulogize the character of James I. Though up to this time
Abbot had had no experience in the charge of an ecclesiastical
benefice, he was nominated by the king soon after his return
from Scotland to the bishopric of Coventry and Lichfield,
and was translated to that of London before he had sat one
2 Ibid. > W. H. Frere, The English Church, p. 367.
334
George Abbot
month in the former see (January, 1610). On March 4, 1611,
he was promoted to the see of Canterbury.
In spite of his Calvinistic views, Archbishop Abbot was at
first in high favour at court. Henry Prince of Wales was
favourably inclined to Puritanism, and the elevation of Abbot
to the primacy is believed to have been partly due to his
influence. The death of the prince in November, 1612,
was a great blow to the Puritan party.
Like many of the best Puritans of his time, Abbot accepted
episcopacy, and remained loyal to the Church of England.
He showed great zeal in persecuting the nonconformists. In
March, 1612, Bartholomew Legate, who was accused of having
embraced the Arian heresy, was burnt to death at Smithfield.
Abbot, supported by King James, had strongly urged his con-
demnation on the judge. A month later, Edward Wightman,
convicted of ten heresies of the very names of which he prob-
ably was ignorant, was publicly burnt in the market-place at
Lichfield.*
The marriage of the Princess Elizabeth to the Elector
Palatine, which had been delayed owing to Prince Henry's
death, was solemnized by the archbishop in February, 1613.
During his stay in England the Elector had shown much
favour to Abbot, and before returning to Germany gave him
a present of plate to the value of £1,000. The archbishop's
gratitude for the Elector's kindness was shown some months
later, when he urged James I. to support the election of his
son-in-law to the crown of Bohemia. Though Abbot opposed
King James in the matter of the divorce of the profligate
Lady Essex, he continued on good terms at court, and is
said to have been the first to introduce George Villiers
(afterwards Duke of Buckingham) to the royal favour. He
persuaded James to exert his influence against Catholics
abroad, and succeeded in effecting the dismissal from his
office of Vorstius, a professor of theology at Leyden.
In 1618, King James issued a book of sports in which he
authorized the people of England to engage in certain harmless
games on Sundays. The declaration was ordered to be read
in churches, but Abbot, stanch to the principles of his party,
refused to read it in the parish church at Croydon, where he
* Hook, Lives of the Archbishops, Vol. X., p. 270.
335
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
was then residing. Though the king winked at his refusal,
from this time the archbishop gradually lost favour.5 By
the death of Queen Anne, whom he attended on her last hours,
Abbot lost a true friend.
In the summer of 1621 the archbishop made a tour through
Hampshire for the benefit of his health, and was invited
by Lord Zouche to shoot on his estate at Bramzil Park. On
July 24, while hunting deer in the park, his Grace let fly an
arrow from a cross-bow which accidentally struck a certain
Peter Hawkins, one of Lord Zouche's keepers who had been
warned to keep out of the way. The arrow pierced his right
arm, severing an artery, and the unfortunate man bled to death
in an hour.
Though the archbishop was in no way to blame, this sad
accident threw him into a deep melancholy. Upon the widow
of Hawkins he immediately bestowed on annuity of £20,
which soon procured her another husband. For the rest of
his life Abbot observed a monthly fast on Tuesday, the day of
the fatal occurrence.6
The affair caused much talk, and the question arose
whether the archbishop, by having blood on his hands, had
not become disqualified to discharge the duties of his office.
In contrast to the cruelty of some of Abbot's opponents King
James showed much kindly feeling. His remark on hearing
of the accident was : " An angel might have miscarried in
this sort."
Four bishops, one of whom was Abbot's old enemy Laud,
Bishop-elect of St. David's, were at that time waiting to be
consecrated, and three of them refused to receive the rite
from Abbot, " lest they might be attainted with the contagion
of his scandal and uncanonical condition." Commissioners
were appointed by the king to make full enquiry into the
law of the case. They varied greatly in their judgment, but
eventually agreed that the archbishop might receive restitution
by the king. James accordingly issued a commission to eight
bishops under the great seal authorizing them to declare the
archbishop assoiled of all irregularity and capable of the
full authority of a primate.7 Before the issue of this de-
claration the four bishops-elect had been consecrated by
s Ibid., p. 274. 6 Biog. Brit., I., 9. » Ibid.
336
George Abbot
suffragans delegated by Abbot. The incident cast a shadow
over the remainder of his career. It is related that shortly
before his death, when the archbishop was on his way to
Croydon, his coach was stopped by a crowd of women
assembled in the road. On his complaining of the delay some
of them shouted, " You had best shoot an arrow at us."
Abbot boldly declared his disapproval of the marriage
proposed between Prince Charles and the Infanta of Spain,
and like all loyal churchmen greatly rejoiced when the project
was abandoned.
On the death of James, Archbishop Abbot crowned
Charles I. in Westminster Abbey. The influence of the Duke
of Buckingham, who was the friend of Laud, now became
paramount. In spite of the gratitude which the duke owed
his early patron, he lost no opportunity in showing animosity
towards him.
In Lent, 1627, a sermon was preached by Dr. Sibthorpe,
vicar of Brackley in Northamptonshire, to justify a loan which
the king had demanded. The archbishop was required by
Charles to license this sermon for publication, but refused to
do so. He was consequently ordered to withdraw to his estate
at Ford, near Canterbury, until the king's pleasure should be
made known.8
On October 9, the king granted a commission to the
bishops of London, Durham, Rochester, Oxford, Bath and
Wells to execute archiepiscopal authority in the room of
Abbot, the reason assigned being that he was unable to attend
to his duties as primate. He was however, summoned to the
parliament which met in 1628, and took an active part in the
discussions concerning the " Petition of Rights," of which he
heartily approved. In May 1630, Abbot, baptized the Prince
of Wales, afterwards Charles II., but owing to the enmity of
Buckingham and Laud, which he did much to foster by his
bigoted Calvinism, he look little part in public affairs during
the last years of his life. In 161 9 he had founded at
Guildford, his native town, a hospital for the maintenance of
a master, twelve brethren, and eight sisters. To this
sanctuary he would often retire when oppressed by the cares
of his office. He died at Croydon on August 4, 1633, at the
8 Gardiner's Hist, of England, VI. , 206.
337
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
age of seventy-one, worn out by cares and infirmities.
He was buried, as he had desired, in the chapel of our Lady
in Trinity Church, Guildford, Surrey. Clarendon, who was
his natural enemy, describes him as a man of morose
manners and very sour aspect.
338
ARCHBISHOP LAUD.
{From the painting bv Van Dyrk.)
74-— WILLIAM LAUD, 1633 to 1645.
King of England : Charles L, 1625 to 1649.
The tragic figure of " the little archbishop " dominates the
whole of English Church history between 1625 and 1645.
The sharp religious antagonisms of historians have rendered
it customary to estimate Laud either as a great saint or a very
bad man. Both views are obviously wrong.
William Laud was born at Reading on October 7, 1573,
and was the only son of William Laud, a clothier. His mother,
whose maiden name was Lucy Webb, was the widow of John
Robinson, of Reading, and sister of Sir William Webb, who
was Lord Mayor of London in 1591. After Laud rose to
greatness the Puritans frequently derided his mercantile
origin.
He received his early education at the grammar school of
his native place, afterwards proceeding to St. John's College,
Oxford, where he was elected a fellow in 1593. He was
described at this time as a youth of diminutive stature and
extraordinary precocity. His health was never good, and he
was subject throughout his life to sudden attacks of illness.1
In 1594 he graduated B.A., afterwards proceeding to M.A.
in 1598, and D.D. in 1608. In 1601, at the age of
twenty-seven, he took priest's orders. The religious
atmosphere of Oxford was then strongly Calvinistic, and
the first period of Laud's ecclesiastical career was marked
by conflicts with the university authorities. In a sermon
preached by him shortly after his ordination, he main-
tained the doctrine of the perpetual visibility of the Church
of Christ from apostolic times. This sermon caused gieat
offence to Abbot (q.v.), who was then master of University
College, and vice-chancellor, and who from this time appears
to have become Laud's bitterest enemy. Another sermon
' Laud's Diary, passim.
339
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
which Laud preached in St. Mary's in 1606 brought on him
a vehement attack from Dr. Airey, vice-chancellor and
provost of Queen's College.2 Against the charge of popery
brought against him Laud defended himself with great ability,
and his enemies could discover no portion of the sermon which
as members of the Church of England they could require him
to retract. From time to time, however, the same accusation
was persistently renewed against him until the close of his life.
In his "Diary" he declares that at this time it was a heresy
to be seen in his company, and a suspicion of heresy to
salute him in the streets.
In 1603 he was appointed chaplain to the Earl of Devon,
whom two years later he married to the divorced wife of Lord
Rich. His consent to officiate at this marriage exposed him
to the deserved reproaches of the Puritans, and he deeply
repented having taken the false step. Though several country
livings were presented to him in succession through the in-
fluence of Dr. Neile, Bishop of Rochester, his preferment was
slow. In April 1611, he was elected president of St. John's
College, in spite of the strenuous opposition of Archbishop
Abbot (q.v.) and others.3 In the following November he was
appointed chaplain to James I., but it was not until five years
later that the king preferred him to the deanery of Gloucester.
Laud found that the cathedral services were performed in a
negligent and irreverent manner. He caused the communion
table which had been placed in the middle of the church, and
which was frequently used as a hat-stand or writing table, to
be placed at the east end and protected by a rail. This
caused great offence to Dr. Miles Smith, the aged bishop of
Gloucester, a strict Calvinist, who refused henceforth to enter
the cathedral.
In 1621 Laud was consecrated bishop of St. David's. In
the following year at the king's command he held a conference
with the Jesuit Fisher, who had attempted to convert the
Countess of Buckingham, mother of the duke. A full report
of the conference, which was afterwards published by Laud,
proves that he was fully determined to make no com-
promise with Rome.4
2 Heylyn's Cyprianus Anglicus, p. 35.
3 Ibid., p. 34. * Laud's Diary, 1621, February 4.
340
William Laud
Almost immediately after the accession of Charles I. Laud
obtained court favour through his friendship with Buckingham.
The parliament of 1626 demanded that Buckingham should
be dismissed. Laud not only took an active part in defend-
ing the duke, but also supported the king's prerogative. He
was rewarded a few months afterwards with the bishopric
of Bath and Wells, and the deanery of the chapel royal.
Two years later he was translated to the see of London. His
conception of loyalty to the Church of England induced him
to exert his whole energy in attempts to stamp out diversity
of opinion by force. One of his first enterprises as bishop of
London was to stop the predestination controversy. For this
purpose he caused the Thirty-nine Articles to be reprinted
with a declaration from the king at the head of them ordering
that all curious search should be laid aside, and " these disputes
be shut up in God's promises as they are generally set forth in
Holy Scriptures, and in the general meaning of the Articles of
the Church of England."5 This declaration caused great
offence to the Puritans.
In April 1629, Laud was appointed chancellor of the
university of Oxford and while holding his office effected
important reforms. He founded chairs of Hebrew and
Arabic, established a university press, and encouraged
foreign students. To the Bodleian Library he presented
many valuable manuscripts.
Laud has been severely blamed for the barbarous sentences
pronounced at this time on libellers and nonconformists in
the courts of the Star Chamber and High Commission. In
1630, Dr. Alexander Leighton, a Scotsman, who had written
a violent treatise against episcopacy, and called the queen a
' daughter of Heth,' was sentenced to be publicly whipped in the
pillory and to have his ears cropped and his nose slit. Similar
punishment was inflicted on the lawyer Prynne for attacking
the queen in his " Histrio-Mastix," a work written in con-
demnation of stage players. Such inhuman mutilations,
however, were customary at the time, and had not been
invented by Laud.
After the murder of Buckingham in 1628, Laud and Went-
worth (afterwards Earl of Strafford) became the king's chief
s Heylyn's Cypvianus Anglicus, p. 120.
341
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
advisers in state matters. Both supported Charles in his
policy of absolutism, and both lacked the foresight necessary
to perceive the catastrophe to which such a policy must
ultimately tend.
In September 1633, Laud succeeded Archbishop Abbot in
the see of Canterbury. One of his first acts after his
elevation to the primacy was to institute a metropolitan
visitation of his province. His vicar-general, Sir Nathaniel
Brent, visited the dioceses, noting every irregularity.
In the removal of the communion tables to the east end
of the churches Laud was supported by the majority of the
clergy, Bishop Williams of Lincoln being his only opponent
among the suffragans. Unfortunately Laud insisted farther
in enforcing conformity in many unimportant details. The
practice of bowing towards the east was made a bone of con-
tention. Clergy who refused to conduct the services precisely
as he desired were tried before the High Commission Court,
and deprived of their livings.
Meantime the hostility of the Puritan party was increasing.
To them there seemed no need for beauty or grace in God's
house, and even in the repair and restoration of the cathedrals
they saw only a move Romewards.6 Rumours were afloat
that Laud had been offered a cardinal's hat, and strangely
enough the offer is recorded in his "Diary." It appears to have
been made on two occasions, but was promptly refused. As
his loyalty to the Church of England was well known at the
Vatican the offer was probably a trap laid for him by the
Puritans.
In April 1633, Laud had been elected chancellor of the
university of Dublin. With the help of Strafford, who
had been made Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the Irish
Church was induced to adopt uniformity of ritual. In
Scotland the archbishop was less successful. Laud had
visited Scotland in company with James I. in 1617, and
had aroused much hostility by appearing in a white
surplice at a funeral. In June 1633, he attended Charles at
his Scottish coronation, solemnized at Edinburgh. Before
leaving Scotland Charles ordered a new Prayer Book to be
compiled by a committee of Scottish bishops, whom he directed
6 Cf. Dean Spence, Hist, of the English Church, Vol. IV., p. 63.
342
William Laud
to correspond with Laud on the subject. After some revision
and correction, the Scottish liturgy was duly approved by the
archbishop.
In July 1637, an attempt was made to read the new liturgy
in the churches in Edinburgh. In the cathedral of St. Giles'
the dean in his surplice had no sooner begun to read the
prayers from his desk than a hideous noise was raised by the
congregation, and the hapless dean assailed by a shower
of sticks and stones. The bishop himself ascended the pulpit
to remonstrate with the insurgents, but was quelled by Jenny
Geddes, of famous memory, who launched a stool at his head.
This attempt to force on the Scottish people a form of prayer
which they disliked resulted in the abolition of episcopacy in
Scotland. In the following year the Scots signed a National
Covenant in which they bound themselves to support their
own form of religion against all who attacked it.
After the dissolution of the Short Parliament, which refused
to supply the king's wants, Strafford and Laud declared that
Charles was free to supply them as he willed. Meantime the
Scots ravaged the north of England, but Charles had no
money to raise an army against them. There were riots
in many places and an attack was made on the archbishop's
palace at Lambeth. Though it was usual to dissolve the
convocation along with the parliament, the king ordered that
body to continue its sessions, in order to complete its grant
of six subsidies already promised him. Seventeen canons
were passed for the better government and peace of the
Church. It was also decreed that an oath should be imposed
on the clergy and laity binding them to oppose any alteration
in the government of the Church by bishops, deans, arch-
deacons, etc.7 This, which was afterwards contemptuously
called " the et cetera oath," raised a storm of indignation
among the Puritans.
The Long Parliament, the most famous in history, met
on November 3, 1640. One of its first acts was to impeach
Strafford and send him to the Tower. Convocation was
voted down, and its canons declared to be without binding
force on the clergy or the laity. A committee was appointed
to enquire how far his Grace of Canterbury had been concerned
"> Cyprianus Anglicus, p. 118.
343
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
in the recent proceedings of the convocation and in the
treasonable design of subverting the religion and laws of his
country. Sir Harbottle Grimstone, one of the members,
declared that the archbishop was " the very sty of all that
pestilential filth that had infested the government, and the
source of all the miseries which the nation groaned under."
Laud was committed to the custody of Maxwell, gentleman
usher of the black rod, in whose house he remained for ten
weeks.
On February 26, 1641, Prynne, Hampden and Maynard
presented fourteen articles of impeachment against the
archbishop at the bar of the House of Lords. The charges
brought against him included those of endeavouring to sub-
vert the constitution by introducing arbitrary powers of
government without limitation or rule of law ; of settling
justice in his own person under colour of his ecclesiastical
jurisdiction ; of bringing in popish doctrines, opinions and
ceremonies contrary to the articles of the Church and cruelly
persecuting those who opposed them; of endeavouring to
bereave the kingdom of the legislative power by alienating
the king's mind from his parliaments. Upon these charges
the Lords voted the removal of his Grace to the Tower,
whither he was conveyed on March 1, amid the clamour
and reviling of the populace.8
In the excitement occasioned by Strafford's trial Laud
remained forgotten for the time being. The two prisoners
in the Tower were not permitted to see each other. The night
before his execution Strafford desired to have an interview
with his old friend, but this was refused. On the morning of
May 10 the earl was led out to die. He had requested that
Laud would be at the window of his cell to give him his blessing
as he passed.9 The old archbishop stretched out his shaking
hands through the bars to bless him, and fell back fainting
into the arms of his attendants, " Farewell, my lord, may
God protect your innocency," said Strafford, and passed on his
way calm and fearless.
During the first two years of the Civil War Laud was
left to languish in the Tower. In May 1643, Prynne received
8 Laud's Diary, March 1, 1640.
4 Diary, May 12, 1640.
344
William Laud
an order from parliament to search the archbishop's private
papers, and afterwards published a mutilated edition of
his "Diary." If anything was required to prove the
deep piety and blamelesnesss of Laud's private life, the
"Diary" which had been written for no eye but his own to
read should have done so. It contained many touching
prayers for his enemies and for himself. But nothing could
quench the malice of the Puritans. His trial did not begin
until March 12, 1644. It continued for five months, during
which the aged primate defended himself with extraordinary
courage and ability. As it was found impossible to bring his
conduct under a charge of high treason, the Commons
resorted, as in the case of Strafford, to a bill of attainder.
As later in the case of King Charles, the proceedings were
marked by the entire absence of any respect for law or
justice.
A full pardon, signed with the great seal of England, had
been sent by Charles I. to the archbishop in April, 1643. This
Laud produced after the death sentence had been pronounced,
but it was rejected by the Commons. His petition that he
might die by the sword instead of on the gallows, the usual
penalty for treason, was granted only with reluctance.
January 10 was the day fixed for his execution. On the
evening before he partook of a modest supper and then re-
tired to rest. His sleep was sound and he did not wake until
roused by his servants. On Tower Hill a vast multitude had
assembled to see him die. Even at the scaffold he was
treated with indignity by the Puritans. After reading a
speech in which he acknowledged himself to have been a
sinner, but solemnly protested his innocence of any offence
deserving death, he presented the executioner with a piece
of money and gave him the sign when to strike. Kneeling
by the block, he gave utterance to the following touching
prayer: " Lord, I am coming as fast as I can. I know I must
pass through the shadow of death before I can come to Thee.
But it is but umbra mortis, a mere shadow of death, a little
darkness upon nature. But Thou by Thy merits and passion
hast broken through the jaws of death. So, Lord, receive
my soul, and have mercy upon me ; and bless this kingdom
with peace and plenty, and with brotherly love and charity,
345
28
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
that there may not be this effusion of Christian blood amongst
them, for Jesus Christ, His sake, if it be Thy will."10 He then
prayed silently awhile, no man hearing what he said. His
last words were " Lord, receive my soul." This was the sign
to the executioner to strike. The archbishop was in his
seventy-second year at the time of his execution.
He was buried in the church of All Hallows, Barking, near
the Tower. After the Restoration his remains were removed
to the chapel of St. John's College, Oxford, and deposited
beneath the altar.
The famous archbishop was of low stature, of a cheerful and
ruddy countenance, of a sharp and piercing eye, clear judg-
ment, and wondrous good memory. Laud was unmarried.
He had a remarkable faith in dreams and omens ; many of
his dreams are recorded in his " Diary." Among other pets
he possessed a tortoise, the shell of which is still preserved
at Lambeth. After living for 120 years it was killed by
a gardener who accidentally overturned his wheelbarrow
upon it.
Of Laud's purity of life, disinterestedness and courage
there can be no question. His worst errors arose from a cer-
tain narrowness of view; and he failed to see that the exercise
of force weakened the authority of the Church in spiritual
matters. In spite of his errors, English churchmen owe him
boundless gratitude, for it is probable that had he not been
raised up the Church would have at this time succumbed to
Puritanism either by surrender or compromise. When the
Church finally emerged from the troubles of the revolution
the more important Laudian reforms were adopted without
hesitation. But the triumph was only achieved by a total
abandonment of his intolerant methods."
Laud's extant works consist of a volume of sermons pub-
lished in 1651 ; " A Relation of the Conference with Fisher "
(1624) ; his " Diary," and " A History of his Troubles and
Trial," not published till 1695.
Cyprianus Anglicus, p. 55, Lib. 5.
Cf. S. R. Gardiner, Art. on Archbishop Laud in Diet, of Nat. Biog.
346
ARCHBISHOP JUXON.
(From an original portrait at St. John's College, Oxford.)
75-— WILLIAM JUXON, 1660 to 1663.
King of England : Charles II., 1660 to 1685.
A vacancy of fifteen years in the see of Canterbury followed
the execution of Archbishop Laud. Out of 10,000 English
clergy 7,000 had been deprived of their livings by the acts of
the Commonwealth. At the Restoration many were in exile,
others living in obscurity. Only nine bishops were alive.
Out of these the aged Bishop Juxon was chosen without
hesitation for the primacy. He was the closest link with
memories which the royalists felt to be sacred,1 for he it was
who had attended Charles I. at the scaffold.
William, the son of Richard Juxon, was born at Chichester
in 1582. His father was receiver-general of the bishop of
Chichester's estates. The family of Juxon resided in London,
and were connected with the Company of Merchant Taylors.
William received his early education at Merchant Taylors'
School, whence he proceeded to St. John's College, Oxford,
where, according to Wood, he was elected a fellow in 1598.3
He was at first intended for the bar, and with this in view took
his degree of bachelor of Civil Law in 1603, afterwards study-
ing at Gray's Inn. Before completing his legal studies, he
decided unexpectedly to enter the Church, and commenced a
divinity course. Shortly after his ordination in 1609, ne was
presented by his college to the living of St. Giles, near Oxford,
and in 1615 to that of Somerton in the same county.
Juxon succeeded Dr. Laud as president of St. John's College,
and in 1626 was made vice-chancellor of the university.
About the same time he received a prebend in Chichester
Cathedral, and the deanery of Worcester. After the election
of Laud as chancellor of Oxford, Juxon took an active part
in assisting him to remodel the statutes of the university.
In 1632, he was appointed on Laud's recommendation clerk
1 W. H. Hutton, The English Church, p. 182.
3 Athena Oxon., IV., 818.
347
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
of his Majesty's closet. Juxon's principles at this period may
be gathered from Laud's own statement that he urged this
appointment in order to have near his Majesty one whom he
could trust, if he himself grew sick or infirm.3 The same
potent influence procured for Juxon the bishopric of Hereford
in 1633, but before his consecration to that see he was elected
to the bishopric of London, vacant by the promotion of
Laud to the primacy. About the same time Juxon was made
dean of the Chapel Royal, and in the following year Lord
High Treasurer. This office had not been filled by a church-
man since the reign of Henry VII., and Juxon's appointment
gave great offence to the Puritans. Laud, however, alludes
to it in his " Diary " with much satisfaction. " Now if the
Church will not hold up itself, under God I can do no more,"
he writes. The personal virtues of the bishop were acknow-
ledged on all sides, and the Puritans could find no fault with the
strict honesty of his dealings. His kindly disposition caused
him to be much beloved by the people of London, and con-
temporary writers declare that he never made an enemy.4
In 1636 he was made lord of the admiralty, an office which he
held until 1638, when the young Duke of York succeeded him
as Lord High Admiral. At the trial of Strafford, Juxon was
summoned as one of the witnesses, but declared he knew
nothing concerning the purpose of the earl to bring an Irish
army to England. Juxon opposed the bill of attainder
brought against Strafford and besought the king to withhold
his assent from the measure. Finding that his pleadings
were vain, he resigned his civil office, and retired to Fulham.
Repeated attempts were made by both parties in the state
to engage the bishop on their side, but he refused to take any
active part either in the schemes of Charles, or of the Parlia-
mentary party. In 1643, he was forced to pay 500 pounds
for the support of the Parliamentary army. In 1646 a pro-
posal was made by the Scottish Presbyterians to restore
Charles to the throne if he would support their form of worship.
A private letter is extant, addressed by the king to Juxon,
in which he asks the bishop if he may, with a safe conscience,
give way to their demands. The reply signed by Juxon and
3 Ibid., p. 819.
* Cf. Sir Philip Warwick's Memoirs, p. 94.
348
William Juxon
Brian Duppa, Bishop of Salisbury, assures the king of the
wisdom of the course suggested.5
At the treaty signed in the Isle of Wight, Juxon attended
as one of the commissioners on the king's side, and was after-
wards in close attendance on his majesty from the commence-
ment of the trial to the last scene on the scaffold. During the
last days of his life Charles desired to keep his mind clear,
and excused himself from receiving even his friends. To
Juxon, to whom he had frequently referred as " that good
man," he turned for spiritual comfort in face of the last ordeal.
On the morning of January 30, 1649, Charles spent an hour
in private with the bishop. In the progress through the
royal park, Juxon walked on the king's right. After his
speech at the scaffold the king told the executioner that he
would say a very short prayer, " and when I thrust out my
hands ." Turning to the bishop he said, " I have a good
cause and a gracious God on my side." " There is but one
stage more," replied Juxon, " a stage turbulent and trouble-
some, but it will carry you from earth to heaven." " I go,"
said the king, "from a corruptible to an incorruptible crown,
where no disturbance can be — no disturbance in the world."
The king took off his cloak and with it the insignia of the
" George" which he delivered to Juxon, saying, "Remember."
When all was over the bishop with several lay lords accom-
panied the royal remains to Windsor and was present at the
burial in St. George's Chapel on February 7. It took place
in the midst of a blinding snow storm. He was not
permitted to read the burial service.6 Juxon afterwards
returned to Fulham, whence he was summoned to appear
before the High Court of Justice. His papers were searched
and he was examined as to the meaning of the king's last
word " Remember." His assertion was accepted that it had
reference to the conveyance of the "George" to the Prince of
Wales.
For the next ten years Juxon lived in peaceful retire-
ment at his manor of Little Compton in Gloucestershire.
There he had many friends among the neighbouring gentry,
whom he often joined in hunting parties. At the Restora-
s W. H. Hutton, The English Church, pp. 135-138.
6 Life of Archbishop Juxon, W. H. March, p. 64.
349
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
tion he was unanimously chosen for the primacy, in spite of
his age and infirmities. On September 20, 1660, his election
was confirmed in Henry VII 's Chapel, Westminster, in the
presence of a rejoicing assembly of clergy and laity. Though
greatly enfeebled by age, Juxon was able to take part in the
coronation of Charles II. He was present at some of
the meetings of the Savoy Conference for the restoration
of the English Prayer Book, but though he was nominally
the president, the chief conduct of affairs was in the hands
of Sheldon, Bishop of London.
Archbishop Juxon died at Lambeth on June 4, 1663, aged
eighty-one. He was buried in the chapel of St. John's College,
Oxford, near the spot where the body of Laud was interred
a few days later. Juxon had expressed a wish to be buried
without pomp or display. His desire was disregarded, for a
more ostentatious and elaborate funeral has scarcely ever
been described. The hearse was drawn by six horses with
escutcheons on their foreheads and backs, and attended by
sixty horsemen; the mourners occupied fifteen coaches,
thirteen of which were drawn by six horses.7
Juxon was unmarried. To the poor he was a generous
benefactor. He augmented the stipends attached to the
vicarages of his province, and spent nearly 15,000 pounds
on repairs at Lambeth and Croydon. For the repair of
St. Paul's Cathedral he left 2,000 pounds.
y Vernon Staley, Life and Times of Gilbert Sheldon, p.
350
ARCHBISHOP SHELDON.
(After the portrait by Lely in the Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford.)
76.— GILBERT SHELDON, 1663 to 1677.
King of England : Charles II., 1660 to 1685.
After a vacancy of little more than two months the king
decided to nominate to the primacy Gilbert Sheldon, who was
the fifth bishop of London in succession to be translated
to the see of Canterbury.
Gilbert was born in a farm-house at Stanton, in Stafford-
shire, on June 19, 1598. His Christian name was given him
at baptism by Gilbert, seventh Earl of Shrewsbury, in whose
house his father, Roger, was a menial servant, though of ancient
family. At the age of fifteen, he was admitted a commoner to
Trinity College, Oxford, where he graduated B.A. three years
later. In 1622, he was elected a fellow of All Souls, from which
college he graduated B.D. in 1628 and D.D. in 1634. After
his ordination he became domestic chaplain to Lord Coventry,
Keeper of the Great Seal, who recommended him to Charles I .
His early preferments included a prebend in Gloucester
Cathedral, the rectories of Newington and Ickford in Bucks,
the vicarage of Hackney in Middlesex, the wardenship of
All Souls College, and a royal chaplaincy. He was also
appointed clerk of his Majesty's closet.1 He attached himself
to the party of Falkland and Hyde and was in attendance on
the king at intervals during the civil wars ; Charles I. nomin-
ated him to the wardenship of Savoy Hospital and the
deanery of Westminster, but the war prevented his settlement
in these offices. About this time he became one of the king's
chief advisers. He was sent by Charles to attend his com-
missioners at the signing of the treaty of Uxbridge, and
incurred on that occasion the enmity of the parliamentary com-
missioners by his vehement defence of the Church.2 Sheldon
was in attendance on the king at Oxford in April 1646, when
his Majesty drew up in writing a promise to give back to the
1 Le Neve, Lives of Protestant Bishops, p. 177.
1 Ibid.
351
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Church, should God restore him to the throne, all the crown
lands and other property taken from abbeys and religious
houses. A copy of this deed was preserved by Sheldon
underground for thirteen years.3 The king's vow is dated
fourteen days before he left Oxford for the last time to set
out for Scotland.
In 1684, Sheldon was arrested and imprisoned at Oxford.
After a few months he was released on taking an oath not
to come within five miles of Oxford or the Isle of Wight,
where King Charles was at that time confined. He retired
to Shelstone in Derbyshire, where he lived in seclusion during
the Commonwealth, and frequently sent sums of money to the
exiled prince.
Shortly before the return of Charles II. to England, Sheldon
was renominated to the wardenship of Savoy Hospital. At
the Restoration his loyalty was rewarded by the deanery of
the Chapel Royal and on October 28, 1660, he was conse-
crated bishop of London. He presided at the conference
which met at Savoy Hospital in April 1661 (vide Juxon),
to consider the advisability of making certain alterations
in the Book of Common Prayer in accordance with Pres-
byterian views. The demands of the Presbyterians were,
however, too extravagant to admit of a compromise, and the
conference came to nothing. A careful revision was after-
wards made of the Prayer Book, but no concession was made
to the Puritan party.
In August 1662, a new Act of Uniformity came in force, and
nearly 2,000 nonconformists were ejected from their benefices,
university lectureships and public offices. Though Sheldon
approved of this act, he is said to have occasionally protected
nonconforming clergy. During the last years of Juxon's fife,
Sheldon practically governed the Church, and was high in the
favour of King Charles II. and and his chief minister, Lord
Clarendon.4
On August n, 1663, Sheldon was nominated to succeed
Archbishop Juxon in the see of Canterbury. One of his
first acts was to make a verbal agreement with Clarendon
that the clergy should henceforth cease to tax themselves in
3 Cf. Vernon Staley, Life and Times of Gilbert Sheldon, p. 42.
4 Ibid.
352
Gilbert Sheldon
Convocation, and should in consequence exercise the right to
vote as members of the House of Commons.5
In the early part of Charles's reign certain acts were passed
which greatly embittered the Puritans. By the Conventicle
Acts religious assemblies of more than four persons were made
illegal. Informers against breakers of this law were to receive
a share of the fines. The Five Mile Act made it penal for any
nonconformist minister to come within five miles of any city or
of any place where he had formerly ministered, unless he had
taken an oath of allegiance to the king and to the Church of
England. Archbishop Sheldon called on his clergy to enforce
these infamous acts, which he declared were likely to pro-
mote " the glory of God, the welfare of the Church and the
praise of his Majesty and his government."
During the terrible plague which visited London in 1665,
the archbishop continued at Lambeth exposed to the greatest
danger, and by his extensive charities preserved the lives
of many who would have otherwise perished. After the
Great Fire of London he gave 2,000 pounds towards
the rebuilding of St. Paul's Cathedral.
On the banishment of Lord Clarendon in 1667, Sheldon
was appointed chancellor of the university of Oxford,
and acted as such, though he was never sworn in or
installed. Charles II. frequently attempted to make use
of the fellowships of All Souls' and other colleges to reward
needy royalists. This infringement of the rights of the
university was stoutly opposed by Sheldon.6 The archbishop's
influence at court seems to have declined along with that of
his friend Clarendon. He courageously rebuked the king for
his shameless adultery, and refused him the sacrament.
In 1667 Sheldon consequently lost the king's favour.
The last few years of his life, during which he suffered much
from the infirmities of age, were spent chiefly at Croydon.
He died at Lambeth on November 9, 1677, in his eightieth
year. He was buried at Croydon, where a monument was
afterwards erected to his memory by his nephew, Sir Joseph
Sheldon (Lord Mayor of London in 1676). The famous
Sheldonian theatre was erected at Oxford at the archbishop's
s W. H. Hutton's The English Church, p. 199.
6 Burrow's Worthies of All Souls, p. 239.
353
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
expense, though he never visited the city after its completion.
The building was designed by Sir Christopher Wren, and
cost 25,000 pounds. Sheldon was induced to undertake this work
by his strong feeling against the profanation of St. Mary's
Church by the annual Acts called "Commemorations"
which had always been performed there.7 To the theatre
was added the Sheldonian printing-house. Sheldon was a
patron of men of letters and a prelate of undoubted piety.
He is said to have offended the Puritans by declaring that
honest deeds were of more value than pious words.
> Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, II, 39.
354
ARCHBISHOP SANCROFT.
77-— WILLIAM SANCROFT, 1677 to 1691.
Kings of England : Charles II., 1660 to 1685.
James II., 1685 to 1688.
William Sancroft or Sandcroft, the second son of Francis
Sancroft, of Fressingfield, Suffolk, and Margaret, his wife,
daughter of Thomas Bouchier, was born on January 30, 161 7.
He received his early education at the grammar school of
Bury St. Edmunds, where he showed proof of unusual abilities.
At the age of sixteen he was admitted to Emmanuel College,
Cambridge, where his uncle, William Sancroft, was master,
and graduated B.A. 1637, M.A. 1641 and B.D. 1648. The
year in which he was elected to a fellowship is uncertain, but
it was probably about 1642. T His proficiency in Greek, Latin
and Hebrew obtained for him a readership in his college, and
he retained his fellowship until 1651, when he was ejected for
refusing to take the " Engagement " oath, by which a certain
measure of freedom of worship was allowed to those who
engaged to be faithful to the Commonwealth.
He then retired to Fressingfield, where he lived quietly for
some years in his brother's house, engaged chiefly in literary
work. During this period he published two treatises which
attracted considerable attention. The first, " Fur Praedestin-
atus," was a Latin dialogue between a Calvinistic preacher
and a thief, and was intended to hold up the doctrines of
Calvinism to ridicule. The other treatise, entitled " Modern
Politics," was a satire on the fanaticism of the party in power.
In 1657, Sancroft left England with the intention of taking
up his residence in Holland, but after visiting Amsterdam,
the Hague and Utrecht, he was persuaded to accompany
a friend to Italy. While in Rome news reached him
of the Restoration. On his return to England he was
made chaplain to John Cosin, Bishop of Durham, who made
1 Le Neve, Lives of Protestant Bishops, p. 197.
355
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
him a prebendary of Durham, and rector of Houghton-
le-Spring. In August 1662, he was appointed master of
Emmanuel College, which he governed with great prudence
and ability.2 Two years later he was appointed by the
the king to the deanery of York, but had held this office only
ten months when he was made dean of St. Paul's. After the
Great Fire of London he eagerly promoted the design for
building a new cathedral, and it was mainly through his
exertions and bounty that the magnificent plan of Sir
Christopher Wren was at last adopted. The first stone of the
new building was laid under the superintendence of Dr. San-
croft as dean. He visited the cathedral constantly while
the work was in progress, and no materials were bought or
accounts passed without his counsel. In 1668, he was
appointed archdeacon of Canterbury, but refused the
bishopric of Chester, being determined to devote himself
entirely to the restoration of St. Paul's Cathedral.
On the death of Archbishop Sheldon, Sancroft was
promoted to the primacy. James, Duke of York, is said to
have recommended him to the king as being less rabid in his
Protestantism than most of the prominent ecclesiastics of the
day,3 but there never was any doubt of the sincerity of his
attachment to the English Church. Dry den, in his " Absolom
and Achitophel," describes him as
Zadok the priest whom, shunning power and place,
His lowly mind advanced to David's grace.
He was consecrated at Westminster Abbey on January 27, 1678.
One of his first acts undertaken with the king's consent
was to make an ineffectual effort to bring back the Duke of
York from Roman Catholicism to the English Church. The
archbishop visited Charles II. on his death bed, and
admonished him with great freedom to repent of his evil life.
On the evening before his death the king received the last
sacraments from a Benedictine monk named John Huddleston,
whom his brother James had secretly introduced into his bed-
chamber, and died in communion with the Church of Rome.
Immediately after his accession James II. took an oath
before the privy council to defend the liberties of the Church
of England. On April 23, 1685, Archbishop Sancroft crowned
2 Ibid. 3 w. H. Hutton, The English Church, p. 209.
356
William Sancroft
the new king according to the usual service, but the communion
was not administered, owing to James being a Catholic. In
spite of his promises, the king lost no time in granting extra-
ordinary favours to Catholics, whom he appointed to all the
chief offices in the state and the army. He re-established the
High Commission Court, which was to consist of three bishops
and four laymen. Sancroft on a plea of ill-health refused to
act on this tribunal, and thus lost the king's favour.
In the spring of 1687 the king ordered the vice-chancellor
of Cambridge University to be dismissed for refusing to confer
the degree of M.A. on a Benedictine monk, though to do so
would have been contrary to the statutes. Soon afterwards,
when the president of Magdalen College, Oxford, died, James
ordered the fellows to appoint Anthony Farmer, a Catholic of
evil life, to the vacant headship. The fellows met and elected
John Hough, a Protestant, for which act of disobedience they
were all turned out of their college. The laws of the country
were completely ignored, and many English clergy were de-
prived of their benefices in order to make room for Romanists.
These illegal acts aroused great alarm throughout the country,
and many English clergy openly preached against the errors of
Rome. Even Pope Innocent XI. wrote to the king urging
him to be more cautious lest he should lose all by provoking a
revolution. For attempting to remonstrate with James,
Archbishop Sancroft was forbidden to appear at court.
In May 1688, James II. ordered his famous Declaration of
Indulgence, which he had issued in the previous year, to be
read from the pulpits. By this act all penal laws against
nonconformists and Catholics were annulled and liberty of
conscience declared. On the Friday preceding the Sunday on
which this act was to be read in the churches, Archbishop
Sancroft summoned the clergy in haste to Lambeth. A
petition was drawn up expressing the fervent loyalty of the
Church to the crown, but protesting against the order to read
in God's house a declaration which was against the law. The
petition was written in the archbishop's hand, and signed by
himself and Bishops White of Peterborough, Lloyd of St.
Asaph, Turner of Ely, Lake of Chichester, Ken of Bath and
Wells, and Trelawny of Bristol. At ten o'clock at night the
six bishops proceeded to the palace to request an interview
357
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
with the king. The archbishop did not accompany them, as
he was still forbidden to appear at court.
On reading the document, James expressed the greatest
indignation. " I did not expect this from your Church,"
he said. " It is a standard of rebellion. Go back to your
dioceses and see that I am obeyed. God has given me the
dispensing power and I will maintain it." On the following
Sunday out of 10,000 clergy only 200 read the declaration.
In the churches where it was read the congregations protested
against it by walking out.
The Chancellor Jeffreys, famous as the judge of the
" Bloody Assize," advised James to summon Archbishop
Sancroft and the six bishops before the Court of the King's
Bench on a charge of seditious libel. On appearing they
refused to commit themselves by answering incriminating
questions, and were consequently committed to the Tower.
The river banks were crowded with sympathizing spectators
as the barge conveyed them down the Thames, and landed
them at the Traitors' Gate. The guards asked their blessing as
they entered and many earnest prayers were offered for their
safety. Their prison was attended like the presence chamber
of royalty. The trial began on June 29, and was witnessed
by the chief nobility of England, including thirty-four temporal
peers of the realm.
The trial lasted all day, and in the evening the jury were
desired to retire to consider their verdict. They remained
together in close consultation all night without fire or candle.
About 3 a.m. they [were overheard to be engaged in loud and
eager debate, but at six o'clock they sent a message to the chief
justice that they were at last agreed.4
At ten o'clock the prelates were brought into court, and the
jury pronounced a verdict of " Not Guilty." No sooner were
the words uttered than shouts of joy resounded through the
hall, and were taken up by the anxious crowd waiting outside.
Bells were rung, bonfires were lit, and the people crowded
into the churches to return thanks for the bishops' release.
On the very day of the bishops' acquittal a letter was sent
to William of Orange signed by seven English nobles and
gentleman inviting him to come with an army to protect the
4 George D'Oyle, Life of William Sancroft, Vol. L, p. 306.
358
William Sancroft
religion and laws of England. When the infatuated monarch
became aware of his danger, he sent for Archbishop Sancroft,
and earnestly besought his advice how to regain the ground
he had lost in the affections of his people. The primate
counselled him to dissolve the High Commission Court, to
reinstate the fellows of Magdalen College, Oxford, and to
remove Romanists from the privy council. But it was too late.
On the king's departure from his capital Sancroft was the
first to sign the address to William of Orange, praying him to
summon a free Parliament. The primate favoured the project
of declaring King James unfit to reign on account of his prin-
ciples, and appointing the Prince of Orange custos regni
to carry on the government in the king's name. On learning
that William was determined to secure the crown for himself,
Sancroft declined to take any share in the proceedings of
parliament. He refused to take the oath of allegiance to
William and Mary, declaring that while King James lived he
would acknowledge no other sovereign. In February 1690,
he was deposed from his ecclesiastical functions, along with
five bishops and about four hundred clergy who had also re-
fused to take the oath. These deprived churchmen are known
in history as the Non-jurors.
Sancroft was permitted to remain at Lambeth for some
months, but in June 1691 was cited to answer a writ of intru-
sion. He failed to appear, and on June 23 quitted Lambeth.
He withdrew to Fressingfield, his birthplace, where he spent
the remainder of his days in a small house which he had caused
to be built there. He continued to correspond with the Non-
jurors, who declared that they alone represented the Church of
England. In February 1692, Sancroft solemnly delegated his
archiepiscopal authority to Lloyd, the deposed bishop of
Norwich.5 Other Non-juring bishops were consecrated after
Sancroft's death.
In 1689, the Toleration Act was passed, granting liberty
to all dissenters to worship as they pleased.
On his deathbed Sancroft was visited by Henry Wharton, the
historian, who had been one of his chaplains. To him he com-
mitted his manuscripts and the " Remains of Archbishop Laud,"
which he had been engaged in editing. " You and I have gone
5 Lathbury, Hist, of the Non-jurors, p. 94.
359
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
different ways," he said, " but I trust heaven's gates are wide
enough to receive us both." He died on November 24, 1693,
and was buried in Fressingfield churchyard. His principal
works are " Fur Praedestinatus," 1651 ; " Modern Politics,"
1562 ; three sermons 1654 : nineteen of his private letters
addressed to Mr. North (afterwards Sir Henry North), appeared
in 1757. He was a generous patron of scholars and delighted
to collect information on points of antiquarian interest. Those
who knew Sancroft best affirmed that he was a pious, humble
and good Christian. His career abundantly proves that he was
ready to sacrifice all worldly interests to what he believed
to be his duty. His loyalty to the deposed monarch who had
treated him so ill is a touching feature in his character.
360
£*J(& ^^^m
1
1 JT-7!
•
ARCHBISHOP TILLOTSON.
(From the painting by Kntller in Lambeth Palaee.)
78.— JOHN TILLOTSON, 1691 to 1694.
Sovereigns of England : William III. and Mary II.
(Mary to 1694) 1689 to 1702.
Shortly after the refusal of Archbishop Sancroft to take the
oath of allegiance to William and Mary, the king decided to
nominate to the primacy John Tillotson, Dean of St. Paul's.
There is a story that Tillotson when dean of Canterbury
won favour with William and Mary by an act of generosity.
On their way to Holland soon after their marriage they stopped
for a few days at Canterbury, where they are said to have
been forced to borrow plate for their use at table. Dr.
Tillotson, on hearing of this, immediately got together
all his own plate and sent it, with a loyal message to
the prince and princess by Monsieur Bentinck, who was in
attendance on them.1 The details of this story are, however,
open to doubt, and it is more probable that the dean's
character for moderation and charity recommended him to
William for promotion.
John Tillotson was descended from a Cheshire family of the
name of Tilston, whose ancestor, Nicholas de Tilston, flourished
in the reign of Edward III. His father, Robert Tillotson, was a
wealthy clothier of Sowerby, in the parish of Halifax, York-
shire, and a strict Calvinist. His mother, Mary, daughter of
Thomas Dobson, gentleman of the same place, was a woman of
excellent character, who, unfortunately became insane in
middle age.3 John was born in October 1630, in a house known
as Old Haugh End, in the chapelry of Sowerby. He is believed
to have received his early education at the grammar school
of Colne in Lancashire. At the age of seventeen he entered
Clare Hall, Cambridge, where he graduated B.A. in 1650, and
M.A. in 1654. In 1651 he was admitted to a fellowship.
While at Cambridge, Tillotson was much influenced by the
1 Le Neve, Lives of Protestant Bishops, p. 229.
3 Birch, Life of Tillotson, p. 2.
301
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
writings of Dr. William Chillingworth, the famous theologian,
author of " The Religion of Protestants."3
After the year 1657, he was engaged as tutor to the son
of Sir Edmund Prideaux, of Ford Abbey, Devon, who was
attorney-general to Oliver Cromwell. How long he con-
tinued in this position is uncertain. At the time of the
Protector's death he was in London. The following incident
is thus recorded by Burnet : " Tillotson told me that a week
after Cromwell's death he, being by accident at Whitehall,
and hearing there was to be a fast that day in the household,
went out of curiosity into the presence chamber, where it
was held. On the one side of the table Richard with the
rest of Cromwell's family were placed and six of the preachers
on the other side. There he heard a great deal of strange
stuff, enough to disgust a man for ever of that enthusiastic
boldness. God was, as it were, reproached for Cromwell's
services, and challenged for taking him away so soon."4
Tillotson was at this time attached to the Presbyterian party,
but after the Restoration submitted to the Act of Uniformity,
and in 1663 was presented to the rectory of Keddington in
Suffolk. In the following year he was appointed preacher
at Lincoln's Inn, London, and soon afterwards became the
Tuesday lecturer at the church of St. Laurence Jewry, where
his friend Dr. John Wilkins was rector. In 1664, he married
Elizabeth French, step-daughter of Dr. Wilkins, and niece
of Oliver Cromwell.
His sermons attracted large congregations composed
of many of the leading clergy and other persons of the
highest rank, and were the means of bringing over many
from Calvinism and popery to the Church of England.
His attacks on popery were displeasing to Charles II.,
with whom he was never in great favour. In 1666 he
proceeded D.D., and about this time published his " Rule
of Faith," his first polemic against Roman Catholicism. In
1670, he was appointed dean of Canterbury, and soon after-
wards received a prebend in St. Paul's. After the discovery of
the Rye House Plot, Tillotson, along with Gilbert Burnet
(afterwards Bishop of Salisbury), was sent to minister to Lord
j Ibid.
* History of my own Time (Clarendon Press edition) Part I., p. 147.
362
John Tillotson
William Russell during his imprisonment, and attended him
to the scaffold.
On the succession of William and Mary, Tillotson was at
once admitted to a high degree of favour. In 1689 he was made
dean of St. Paul's and clerk of the king's closet. On his
nomination to the see of Canterbury he expressed great re-
luctance to accept the high office, and several months passed
before he could permit the appointment to be confirmed. He
at length yielded to William's urgent entreaties, but begged
that he might not be represented to the world as driving out
Archbishop Sancroft. He was consecrated on Whitsunday,
May 31, 1691, in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, by the bishops
of Winchester, St. Asaph, Salisbury, Worcester, Bristol and
Oxford. Four days later, he was admitted a privy counsellor.
Tillotson belonged to the party known as the Latitudinarians,
so called because within certain limits they advocated con-
siderable latitude in matters of belief and practice both for
individuals and Churches. Their scheme of comprehension
which was to include the nonconformists was rejected by
Convocation, as it would have involved sweeping changes in the
the Book of Common Prayer. The attitude adopted by
Convocation in this matter was highly displeasing to the
latitudinarian prelates, and during Tillotson's primacy,
though Convocation continued to be summoned by writ, it
was not allowed to meet for debate. While the Prayer Book
was under examination Tillotson revised the collects, making
them more suitable to the epistles and gospels of the day.
This work he carried out with much elegance and purity of
style.3
Tillotson did not long survive his elevation to the primacy.
The death of his only surviving child, Mary, the wife of James
Chad wick, in 1687 was a severe blow to him, and soon after-
wards he had an apoplectic seizure, from which he only par-
tially recovered. On Sunday, November 18, 1694, while
officiating in Whitehall Church he was struck with paralysis,
but remained in his place until the end of the service. He
died at Lambeth on November 22 ; and was buried in the
church of St. Laurence Jewry, his funeral sermon being
preached by Bishop Burnet, of Salisbury. He died almost
s Le Neve, Lives of Prot. Bishops, p. 226.
363
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
penniless, but the copyright of his sermons was afterwards
sold for 2,500 guineas. A complete edition of his works in
fourteen volumes appeared 1 695-1 701.
Archbishop Tillotson was of genial disposition, generous
and hospitable. He made a practice of devoting one
fifth of his income to charity. After his death William III.
declared that he had never known a more honest man.
Bishop Burnet wrote of him : " Tillotson was a man of
a clear head and a sweet temper. He had the brightest
thoughts and the most correct style of all our divines,
and was esteemed the best preacher of the age." "His coun-
tenance," says Birch, " was fair, and very amiable, his face
round, his eyes vivid, and his air and aspect quick and in-
genious, all which were the index of his excellent soul and
spirit ; his hair was brown and bushy ; he was moderately
tall, very slender and sparing in his youth, his constitution
tender and frail to outward appearance. He became corpu-
lent and fat when grown in age, which increased more and
more as long as he lived."
In 1695, King William III. granted to Tillotson's widow,
who survived him till 1702, a pension of £400, which was
increased in 1698 to £6oo."6
6 Ibid., p. 229.
364
79-— THOMAS TENISON, 1695 to 1715.
Sovereigns of England : William III. to 1702.
Anne, 1702 to 17 14.
George I., 17 14 to 1727.
Thomas, son of the Rev. John Tenison, B.D., was born at
Cottenham, in Cambridgeshire, on September 29, 1636. His
mother, Mercy Tenison, was the eldest daughter of Thomas
Dowsing, of Cottenham. The Rev. John Tenison, rector of
Mundesley, in Norfolk, was ejected from his living during the
civil wars for his fidelity to Charles I . After the Restoration he
became rector of Bracon Ash, in Norfolk.1 His son Thomas
received his early education at the free school at Norwich,
whence at the age of seventeen he proceeded to Corpus
Christi College, Cambridge. After graduating B.A. in 1657,
he decided to study medicine, being discouraged from entering
the Church on account of the persecutions to which the epis-
copal clergy were at that time subjected. On the eve of the
Restoration, however, he was ordained privately at Richmond
by Dr. Duppa, Bishop of Salisbury, and graduated M.A.
in 1660, B.D. in 1667, and D.D. in 1680.
In 1662, he was admitted to a fellowship in his college, and in
the year of the Great Plague (1665) was rector of St. Andrew's,
Cambridge. While the pestilence raged he remained at his
post, conscientiously performing the duties of his cure. Two
years later, when he left Cambridge on being presented to the
rectory of Holywell and Needingworth, in Huntingdonshire, his
parishioners presented him with a handsome silver tankard
as a token of their esteem and gratitude.3 About the year 1667
he married Anne, daughter of the Rev. Richard Love, D.D.,
Master of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, and Dean of Ely.
During the next few years he devoted much of his time to
literary work. His first work, " The Creed of Mr. Hobbes
examined," was published in 1670. He appears to have held
' Misc. Geneal. et Heraldic, Vol. II., 3rd series.
2 LeNeve, Lives of Protestant Bishops, p. 236.
365
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
his father's living at Bracon Ash for a short time, and in 1674 he
became preacher at the church of St. Peter Mancroft, in Nor-
wich. In 1680 he was presented by King Charles II. to the
rectory of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, London. This position
brought him into contact with many of the most eminent
men of his day. In July 1685, he attended the Duke of
Monmouth in prison and at the scaffold.3
Tenison took the deepest personal interest in the welfare
of his parishioners. He endowed a free school in his parish,
and built near Leicester Square a handsome free library,
which he furnished with many useful books.4 In the year of
the Great Frost (1683), he distributed three hundred pounds
to the poor out of his own purse. During the reign of
James II., Tenison frequently preached against popery, and in
1687, engaged in a conference with Andrew Pulton, the head
of the Jesuits who had settled at the Savoy. A report of
this conference was afterwards published, and Tenison pre-
pared a number of controversial tracts on the subject of the
debate. He was one of the divines present at Lambeth when
the petition of the seven bishops was drawn up (videSancro ft.)
Shortly after the accession of William and Mary, Dr. Tenison
was nominated by the queen to the archdeaconry of London,
and in 1692 was consecrated bishop of Lincoln. Some
opposition was shown to his elevation to the episcopal bench,
and it was represented to the queen that the doctor, in preach-
ing a funeral sermon for Eleanor Gwynne, the mistress of
Charles II., had spoken in praise of that poor woman. " I
have heard as much," said her Majesty, coolly, "and it
convinces me that the unhappy creature died penitent, other-
wise the good doctor would not have spoken of her so
charitably."'
About a fortnight after the death of Archbishop Tillotson,
the king was pleased to nominate Tenison as his successor.
His appointment was confirmed in January 1695.
One of his first duties after his nomination was to attend
the death-bed of Queen Mary, who was taken ill with small-
pox on December 21 , and died a week later. Tenison preached
her funeral sermon, and is said to have been instrumental in
3 Ibid. 4 Evelyn's Diary, June 18, 1691 ; Feb. 4, 1694.
s Memoirs of Dr. Thomas Tenison, p. 20.
366
Thomas Tenison
bringing about a reconciliation between King William and his
sister-in-law, the Princess Anne. He sternly reproved the
king for his misconduct with Lady Villiers, and obtained from
him a solemn promise to break off all connection with her.
During the king's absences in Holland the archbishop acted
as one of the justices of the kingdom.
Tenison took a deep interest in founding the Society
for the Propagation of the Gospel, the object of which was to
provide clergy for the colonies beyond the seas. The first
meeting of this Society took place at Lambeth Palace on
June 27, 1701. At his death the archbishop left £1,000 for
the Society to provide two English bishops, one for the
continent of Europe and the other for America.
In 1700, Convocation, which had not assembled for ten years,
was permitted to meet, but a perverse and quarrelsome spirit
was at once shown by the members. Those of the Lower House
refused to recognize the authority of the archbishop to pro-
rogue their sessions. The disputes continued on this and
on other subjects when the Houses reassembled after the
accession of Queen Anne.
Archbishop Tenison attended King William on his death-
bed, and on April 23, 1702, crowned Queen Anne in West-
minster Abbey. With her accession he lost favour at court.
He voted against the Occasional Conformity Bill, and further
offended the queen by the zeal he manifested for securing a
Protestant succession. He even ventured to enter into
correspondence with the Electress Sophia on this subject.
In 1706, he was appointed one of the commissioners for the
Act of Union with Scotland.
On October 20, 1714, Archbishop Tenison crowned King
George I. When Tenison was presented to his Majesty, the
king received him very favourably, and was afterwards pleased
to say that he liked him well because the venerable man had
spent an hour and a half in his company, and had not asked
one favour for himself or his friends.6
During the last years of his life, Tenison was much afflicted
with gout. He died on December 14, 1715, and was buried
in the chancel of Lambeth parish church. His wife had
predeceased him in 1714, and he left no issue.
6 Ibid., p. in.
367
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
He built and endowed a charity school at Lambeth for the
education of twelve poor girls. His will contains many curious
bequests. To his successors the archbishops of Canterbury
he left his great fire engine with the buckets kept at Lambeth.
His barge he bequeathed to his bargemen after his executors
had had the use of it for six months from the time of his
decease.
He has been described as " a plain, good, heavy man, tall,
with a fair complexion." James II. dubbed him " a dull man,"
and the epithet stuck to him. Swift declared that he was " a
dull man, who had a horror of anything like levity in the
clergy, especially of whist."7 Like his predecessor Tillotson
(q.v.), he belonged to the latitudinarian party.
His works include " Baconiana " (1678) ; " A Discourse
on Idolatry " ; and " The Difference between the Protestant
and the Socinian Methodists."
Charles J. Abbey, The English Church, I., pp. 94, 95.
368
8o.— WILLIAM WAKE, 1716 to 1737.
Kings of England : George I., 1714 to 1727.
George II., 1727 to 1760.
William Wake was bom at Blandford, in Dorset, on
January 26, 1657, and was the son of William Wake, of
Shapwick, a gallant royalist who had fought in the civil wars.
His family are said to have traced their descent from the
famous Hereward the Wake who flourished in the time of
William the Conqueror. William received his early education
at Blandford Grammar School, whence he proceeded to
Christ Church, Oxford, and graduated B.A. in 1676, M.A. in
1679, B.D. and D.D. in 1689. His father had desired him
to enter business as a clothier, but he declined to comply with
the parental wishes in this respect, and in 1681 received
deacon's orders.
In the following year, after being ordained priest, be became
chaplain to Richard Graham, Viscount Preston, who had been
appointed ambassador to the French court. Wake accom-
panied the viscount to France, and from this period dates
his interest in the affairs of the Gallican Church. In Paris he
came in contact with some of the most eminent scholars of
the period, and was commissioned by Bishop Fell of Oxford to
procure for him the collection of some valuable Greek manu-
scripts of the New Testament. A copy of the celebrated Bishop
Bossuet's " Exposition de laFoiCatholique" having come into
his hands, he wrote a remarkably able answer to this work,
entitled " Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of
England."1 His book offended James II., who on Wake's return
to England opposed his appointment as preacher at Gray's
Inn. He was nevertheless chosen, and became famous as a
preacher of great eloquence.
In 1688, he married Etheldreda, third daughter and co-
heiress of Sir William Hovel, Knight, of Hillington, in Norfolk.
1 Charles J. Abbey, The English Church, I., p. 96.
309
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
By her he had a numerous family. After the accession of
William and Mary he was made chaplain to the king, and
deputy clerk of the royal closet. In 1693, he was presented
to the rectory of St. James's, Piccadilly. Henceforth his
rise was rapid. In 1703 he was made dean of Exeter, and on
October 21, 1705, was consecrated bishop of Lincoln. This
office he held for ten years during which time he took the
deepest interest in the affairs of his see. He drew up a unique
document entitled " Speculum Dioceseos," consisting of" occa-
sional observations" on the various parishes of his large
diocese, evidently the result of his own personal inspection
of them. It includes an account of the chief families resident
in each parish, and of the churches, schools and charitable
institutions.2
In January 1716, Wake was promoted to the primacy.
In the following year he formulated a scheme for uniting
the English and Gallican Churches. The time was to some
extent favourable for this, owing to the strife which had arisen
between the Jesuits and the Jansenists. In 1713 Pope
Clement XI. had issued his famous bull Unigenitus, con-
demning the tenets of the Jansenists, which had spread widely
in the Gallican Church. Archbishop Wake corresponded
with Du Pin, the ecclesiastical historian, and with other
eminent French divines. The project of union was seriously
discussed by the theological faculty at the Sorbonne, but
after the death of Du Pin in 1719 the negotiations were aban-
doned. Wake was accused by certain writers of betraying
the interests of the Church of England by this proposal. But
there is abundant evidence that he contemplated no union
except that which would involve the complete separation of
France from Rome.3 He also corresponded with Jablouski,
the leader of the Polish Lutherans, whom he earnestly ex-
horted not to enter into any arrangement with the Church of
Rome except on a footing of perfect equality. Wake also
showed a deep interest in the welfare of other foreign
Protestant Churches.
During this primacy a breach was created between the
two Houses of Convocation by the Bangorian controversy.
1 Overton and Relton, The English Church, (18th century,) p. 23.
s Mosheim's Eccles Hist., II., 365.
370
William Wake
Dr. Hoadley, Bishop of Bangor, had written a treatise which
denied any divine right to ecclesiastical organizations. The
Lower House called on the Upper House to condemn Dr.
Hoadley's writings, and a violent controversy arose on the
subject. The government looked on the action of the Lower
House of Convocation as implying censure on the Whigs, to
which party Hoadley belonged. In 1717, Convocation was
consequently prorogued by a royal writ and never suffered
again to meet for the despatch of business until the year 1852.
The Non-juring bishops {vide Sancroft) had for some time
been in communication with the Eastern patriarchs, apparently
with a view to strengthen their position by a rapprochement
with the Eastern Church. The correspondence had com-
menced in 1 716, the very year in which Wake was promoted
to the see of Canterbury, and had continued at intervals for
eight years before he had any knowledge of it. His chaplain,
Thomas Payne, was the first to inform him of the proceedings
of the Non-jurors. Wake then wrote to the patriarch of Jeru-
salem a letter in which he exposed the schismatical position of
the Non-juring clergy. It appears, however, that before the
receipt of thisletter the Eastern Patriarchs had become aware,
probably through the British Ambassador at Constantinople,
of the position of the Non-jurors with whom they had been
corresponding, under the erroneous impression that they repre-
sented the whole of the Anglican communion. On finding
that they were an insignificant and gradually diminishing
fraction of the national Church, they hastened to break off
the correspondence as courteously but as quickly as possible.
Wake's letter, while disavowing in the name of the English
Church all complicity in the proceedings of the Non-jurors,
regards the existing relations of the Anglican and Eastern
Churches as most intimate.4
Towards the close of his life, Archbishop Wake became so
much disabled by age and infirmities that some part of the
care of his Church was transferred to Dr. Gibson, Bishop
of London. He died at Lambeth on January 24, 1737, and
was buried at Croydon. He bequeathed his valuable collec-
tion of coins and bis library of printed books and manuscripts,
the whole valued at £10,000, to Christ Church College, Oxford.
« Geo. Williams, B.D., The Orthodox Eastern Church, p. xxviii.
371
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
On the parishes with which he had been connected he bestowed
many benefactions. Wake's character appears to present
a strange compound of liberality and intolerance. Though
he voted against certain measures in favour of the noncon-
formists, in his correspondence and personal friendship with
members of that body he showed much breadth of view. It
has been suggested that his motive for advocating the inser-
tion of the intolerant clauses of the " Occasional Conformity,"
" Schism " and " Quakers' " Bill was that he believed there to
be no such differences between churchmen and noncon-
formists as could justify the latter in standing apart.5 That
he was a man of pacific spirit appears in all his correspondence,
which extended to the leading men of every ecclesiastical
community in Europe.
His principal works are : (i) " The State of the'Church of
England in those Councils, Synods, Convocations, Conven-
tions and other Public Assemblies historically deduced from the
conversion of the Saxons to the Present Time," 1703. (2) " An
English version of the Genuine Epistles of the Apostolic Fathers,
St. Barnabas, St. Ignatius, St. Clement, St. Polycarp, The
Shepherd of Hennas, with a Preliminary Discourse concern-
ing the Use of those Fathers," 1693. (3) " Principles of the
Christian Religion."
5 Charles J. Abbey, The English Church, Vol. I., p. 98.
372
ARCHBISHOP POTTER.
8i.— JOHN POTTER, 1737 to 1747.
King of England : George II., 1727 to 1760.
On the death of Archbishop Wake it was generally expected
that Dr. Gibson, Bishop of London, would succeed to the
primacy. Owing to Wake's infirmities, Gibson had been
virtually primate for six years. His claims were, however,
overlooked in favour of a less eminent man, Bishop Potter,
of Oxford, a protege of Queen Caroline.1
John, the son of Thomas Potter, linen draper, was born at
Wakefield, in Yorkshire, in 1674. At the grammar school
of his native town he made remarkable progress, especially
in the study of Greek, and at the age of fourteen entered
University College, Oxford, as a servitor. He graduated B.A.
in 1692 ; and proceeded in due course to the degrees of M.A.,
B.D., D.D. At the age of nineteen he was advised by
Dr. Charlett, master of University College, to undertake his
first literary work. This was the editing of Plutarch's treatise
De Audiendis Poetis, and the oration of Basil the Great, De
Legendis Grcecorum , with various readings and notes. The work
was published at the University Press, Oxford, in 1694, at
the expense of Dr. Charlett, who used to present copies of it
as New Year gifts to the young students of University College.2
In 1694, Potter was elected to a fellowship at Lincoln
College. He was at this time engaged in editing the works of
the Greek writer, Lycophron, of which he published a
beautiful edition in 1697. In the same year he published
the first volume of his " Archaeologia Graeca," or the Anti-
quities of Greece. This work established his literary fame both
at home and abroad.
In 1698, he took orders, and was presented to the rectory
of Green's Norton in Northamptonshire. This he resigned
in 1700, but subsequently held country livings in Kent, Bucks
1 Cf. Overton and Relton, The English Church, p. 95.
3 Wood, Athena Cantab., Vol. IV., p. 460.
373
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and Oxfordshire. From 1704 to 1707 he was domestic
chaplain to Archbishop Tenison, an appointment which neces-
sitated his residence at Lambeth.3 In 1707 he succeeded Dr.
Jane as Regius Professor of Divinity at Oxford. This position
he is said to have owed to the influence of the Duke of Marl-
borough. Soon after his return to Oxford he married a Miss
Venner, who is said to have been the grand-daughter of
Thomas Venner, the Fifth Monarchy man. Through the
interest of the Duke of Marlborough he obtained the bishopric
of Oxford, to which he was consecrated on May 15, 1715.
While holding this see he was allowed to retain his divinity
chair. On October n, 1727, he preached the coronation
sermon for George II., on whose accession he obtained high
favour at court, especially with Queen Caroline.
In February 1737, Dr. Potter was translated to the see
of Canterbury. As archbishop he assumed a pontifical
state, which laid him open to much censure, especially from
those who were jealous of his promotion. His air of stiffness
and importance offended many, though it was probably
due less to any change of sentiment produced by his ad-
vancement to the primacy than to his innumerable engage-
ments which gave him less time for familiar conversation
and social intercourse.4 He was accused of nepotism on
account of having obtained from the crown three rectories
and the deanery of Exeter for his son-in-law, the Rev.
Jeremiah Miller, who held all these preferments till his death.
He also provided most generously for his wife's relations.
Though a high churchman, Archbishop Potter was a Whig
in politics. During his primacy the Methodist movement,
under the leadership of John and Charles Wesley and George
Whitefield, caused a great religious revival throughout
England. The archbishop showed much sympathy with
the movement. " These gentlemen are irregular, but they
have done much good, and I pray God to bless them," he
once said. Wesley desired that his work should be supple-
mentary to that of the Church of England, from which he
had originally no wish to separate. One of his later sermons
3 Ibid., p. 461.
* Anderson's Preface to ArchcBologia Graca ; cf. Abbey's English
Church, Vol. I., p. 384.
374
John Potter
urging attendance on the Church service concludes with
these words : " Near fifty years ago, a great and good man,
Dr. Potter, then Archbishop of Canterbury, gave me an
advice for which I have ever since had occasion to bless
God, ' If you desire to be extensively useful, do not spend
your time and strength in contending for or against such
things as are of a disputable nature, but in testifying against
open notorious vice and in promoting real essential holiness.' "5
Archbishop Potter died at Lambeth on October 10, 1747,
and was buried in the chancel of Croydon Church. Of his
large family only two sons and three daughters survived him.
He left his fortune to his second surviving son, Thomas,
who was a barrister. His eldest son, John, Dean of Canterbury,
had forfeited his favour by marrying a domestic servant.6
His principal works in addition to those already mentioned
are his edition of " Clementis Alexandrini Opera " ; and his
theological treatises, which were published in three volumes
in 1753. A large number of his sermons and letters have been
preserved.
s Overton and Relton, The English Church, pp. 92, 98.
6 Biog. Brit., Vol. V., p. 3417.
375
82.— THOMAS HERRING, 1747 to 1757.
King of England : George II., 1727 to 1760.
Thomas Herring was bora in 1694 at Walsoken, in Norfolk,
where his father, the Rev. John Herring, was rector. He was
prepared for the university at Wisbech School in the Isle of
Ely, and in June, 1710, matriculated at Jesus College,
Cambridge. After graduating B.A. in 1714, he removed to
Corpus Christi College, where he obtained a fellowship. In
due course he proceeded to the degrees of M.A., B.D. (1724)
and D.D. (1728). Soon after taking orders (1717), he became
a tutor at the university, and afterwards held successively the
rectories of Shelford, Stow-cum-Qui and Trinity in Cambridge.
He had meantime obtained a high reputation as a preacher.
In 1722, Dr. Fleetwood, Bishop of Ely, made him his chaplain,
and in the same year presented him to the rectories of Retten-
den in Essex and Barley in Hertfordshire. In 1725 he was
presented by the king to the rectory of All Hallows the Great,
in London, which, however, he resigned before institution.
In the following year the society of Lincoln's Inn chose him
for their preacher. About the same time he was appointed
a king's chaplain.1 In 1731, he was presented by Sir William
Clayton to the rectory of Bletchingley, in Surrey, and in
February 1732, by George II., to the deanery of Rochester.
On January 15, 1738, he was consecrated bishop of Bangor,
and continued to hold the deanery of Rochester in commendam.
Herring made a visitation of his Welsh diocese, journeying
long distances on horseback over the hills. His correspondence
with his friend William Duncombe, in which he gives a charm-
ing account of the Welsh scenery and people, has been pre-
served. On November 3, 1738,2 he wrote : " We travelled
slowly and commodiously and found Wales a country altogether
as entertaining as it was new. The face of it is grand, and
1 Biog. Brit. (Supplement), p. 89.
2 Letters from Dr. Thomas Herring to William Duncombe, p. 40.
376
Thomas Herring
bespeaks the magnificence of Nature, and enlarged my mind
so much in the same manner as the stupendousness of the
ocean does, that it was some time before I could be reconciled
again to the level countries."
In April 1742, Herring was translated to the archiepiscopal
see of York, and in April took possession of the palace at
Bishopsthorpe, where he made many improvements and added
a new clock to the turret. A friend of Mr. William Duncombe,
writing from York in June 1744, states that there were carved
in one of the bedchambers at Bishopsthorpe on each side of
the chimney two cherubim, weeping bitterly. The story says
that when the carver was asked how it entered into his
head to represent them crying, his answer was that he
appealed to the Te Deum for the propriety of what he had
done.3
Herring was archbishop of York when the rebellion of 1745
broke out in Scotland. A meeting of the nobility, gentry
and clergy of the neighbourhood was held at York Castle
on September 24, 1745. Archbishop Herring addressed the
assembly in an eloquent and spirited speech, calling on all to
unite in the defence of their religion and country. He
reminded them that the Pretender, if successful, would be
supported by the forces of France and Spain," our old and
inveterate enemies, savage and bloodthirsty as of yore." His
speech had the desired effect, for £40,000 was immediately
subscribed to provide means of defence. On the return of
the Duke of Cumberland to York after the battle of Culloden,
the archbishop, at the head of the dean, chapter and clergy,
addressed him in a congratulatory speech.4 The extravagant
eulogies which Herring bestowed on " Butcher Cumberland "
on this occasion convey a somewhat unfavourable impression
of his character, especially in view of the use which the
duke had made of his victory.
The complete record of Herring's visitation of the diocese
of York has been preserved in four folio volumes, and shows
with what care he entered into the details of the parochial
life in his province.
On the death of Archbishop Potter in 1747, Herring was
' Nichols' Literary Illustrations, Vol. Ill , p. 454.
* Biog. Brit. Supplement, p. 90.
377
25
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
translated to the see of Canterbury. He is generally supposed
to have owed his promotion to the strong support given by
him to the house of Hanover in 1745. His primacy seems
to have been uneventful. He resided much at the archi-
episcopal residence at Croydon, to which he was specially
attached, and which he thoroughly repaired. In the summer
of 1753 he was seized at Lambeth with a pleuritic fever,
which nearly ended fatally. This illness so greatly impaired
his health and spirits that, though on his retiring to Croydon
he partly recovered, yet from that time he might rather be
said to languish than to live. He declined as far as possible
all public business, seeing little company but his relations and
particular friends. Once indeed the Princess Dowager of
Wales did him the honour of breakfasting with him, and was
received and entertained with the unaffected courtesy for
which his Grace was distinguished. He died at his Croydon
house on March 13, 1757, and was buried in the parish church.
He was unmarried. His sermons were published in one
volume in 1763, and his letters in 1777. Herring was a
hospitable and benevolent prelate, and was much beloved by
the people of York. He possessed a cultivated mind, but was
apparently more distinguished for political activity than for
administrative power.
Dean Swift, whom Herring had offended, wrote of him in
a contemptuous manner. " I should be very sorry," he says,
"that any of the clergy should be so weak as to imitate a court
chaplain in England who preached against the ' Beggars'
Opera,' which probably will do more good than a thousand
sermons of so stupid, so injudicious, and so prostitute a divine."3
s Quoted from No. 3 of the Intelligencer.
378
83.— MATTHEW HUTTON, 1757 to 1758.
King of England : George II., 1727 to 1760,
Matthew Hutton was born at Marske, in Yorkshire, on
January 3, 1693. His father, John Hutton, of Marske, was a
descendant of Matthew Hutton, who was archbishop of York
in the reign of Elizabeth. His mother was Dorothy, daughter
of William Dyke, of Trant, in Sussex.
Matthew was sent to a school at Kirby Hill, near Richmond,
kept by the Rev. Mr. Lloyd, of Jesus College, Cambridge.
In 1704, Mr. Lloyd was appointed master of the free
school at Ripon, whither Matthew Hutton accompanied
him, and remained there under his tuition for six years. In
June 171 0, he was admitted to Jesus College, Cambridge,
where he graduated B.A. three years later and M.A. in 1717.
In July I7i7,he was elected a fellow of Christ's College, and
was shortly afterwards ordained by Bishop Fleetwood of Ely.
Hutton became chaplain to the Duke of Somerset, by whom
he was presented to the rectory of Trowbridge, in Wilts, and,
after proceeding D.D., to that of Spofforth, near Wetherby.in
Yorkshire.1
In March 1732, Hutton married Mary, daughter of John
Lutman, of Petworth, in Sussex, by whom he had two daughters.
He was presented by Archbishop Blackburne to a prebend in
the cathedral of York, and was soon afterwards made a royal
chaplain. In the latter capacity he accompanied King
George II. to Hanover in 1736.3 On his return he was pre-
ferred to a prebend at Windsor, which he soon afterwards
exchanged for one at Westminster.
Upon the translation of Bishop Herring to York, Hutton
succeeded him in the see of Bangor, to which he was conse-
crated at Lambeth Palace on November 13, 1743. Upon the
removal of Herring to Canterbury, Hutton succeeded him at
1 Correspondence of Matthew Hutton (Surtees Society), p. 40.
* Ibid.
379
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
York. As he had followed Archbishop Herring in the other
removes, so on the death of the latter, Hutton was translated
to Canterbury, being confirmed to the primacy in the church
of St. Mary-le-Bow on April 29, 1757. A dispute having arisen
between his Grace and the executors of his predecessor on
the subject of dilapidations at Lambeth Palace, he never
had an opportunity of living there. During the summer
he resided chiefly at Croydon, and when in town, at his own
house in Duke Street, Westminster.3 He appears to have
been a man of very liberal opinions, and inclined to the lati-
tudinarian party, but his short primacy gave him little
opportunity of effecting any notable reforms. Shortly after
his promotion he was admitted a lord of his Majesty's privy
council, and was also elected a governor of the Charter House,
president of the Corporation of the Sons of the Clergy, and
president of the S.P.G.
On the morning of March 18, 1758, he was seized with violent
pain supposed to proceed from a rupture. Though every-
thing possible was done to relieve his sufferings, he died the
same evening. He was buried in Lambeth chapel, in a vault
near the communion table.
Thomas Wray, his chaplain wrote of him : " He was an
affectionate husband, a very tender-hearted parent and a
kind master. How sincere he was in his professions of friend-
ship those who were admitted to any degree of intimacy with
him will declare. He was very ready in the despatch of
business ; and as I fancy none of his predecessors excelled
him in a graceful and majestic mien, few had a clearer head
or could communicate their thoughts with more readiness
or greater perspicacity. He had a very extensive knowledge
of men and things, and his knowledge of books was very well
digested. His being a little ad rem attentior, I attribute en-
tirely to his having a family, as I have not heard that he ever
discovered such a turn in his younger days."4
J Nichol's Lit. Illustr., Vol. III., p. 469.
4 Ibid, p. 473.
380
84.— THOMAS SECKER, 1758 to 1768.
Kings of England : George II., 1727 to 1760.
George III., 1760 to 1820.
Thomas Secker was born in 1693 at the village of Sibthorpe,
in the Vale of Belvoir, Nottinghamshire. His father, Thomas
Secker the elder, a Protestant dissenter, was a pious and well-
meaning man who owned a small paternal estate. His mother
was a daughter of George Brough, of Shelton, in Nottingham-
shire, a substantial gentleman farmer. Thomas received his
early education at a school at Attercliffe, kept by Timothy
Jollie, a dissenter. In 1710, he was sent to the dissenting
academy of Samuel Jones, then at Gloucester, which was
soon afterwards removed to Tewkesbury. The expenses of
his education were partly defrayed by Dr. Isaac Watts, the
famous hymn-writer. At the Tewkesbury Academy Thomas
Seeker, Joseph Butler (afterwards bishop of Durham), and
Samuel Chandler (afterwards the learned nonconformist
divine), were fellow-pupils, and remained life-long friends.1
Both Secker and Butler were intended for the noncon-
formist ministry, but the former became uncertain as to his
views, and proceeded to Paris to study medicine. While
abroad he continued to correspond with Butler, who had
abandoned the idea of the nonconformist ministry, and
determined to take orders in the Church of England. From
Paris Secker proceeded to Leyden, where he met and formed
a close intimacy with Martin Benson, afterwards bishop of
Gloucester. In 1720, he returned to England, and through the
influence of his friends, Benson, Butler and Dr. Samuel
Clarke, he decided to take orders.
Shortly after his arrival in England, Secker was introduced
by Butler to his friend Edward Talbot, son of William Talbot,
Bishop of Oxford. A few months later, Edward Talbot
died of smallpox. On his death-bed he commended his friends
' Introduction to the Works of Archbishop Secker, by Beilby Porteus.
381
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Butler and Seeker to his father's patronage, and the bishop
afterwards provided for both. As it was necessary for
Seeker to take a degree, he returned to Leyden, where he
graduated as doctor of Physic, having heard that this would
exempt him from certain examinations at Oxford.
On his return to England he entered Exeter College, Oxford,
as a gentleman commoner, in April 1721. A year later he
obtained the degree of B.A. without any difficulty, in conse-
quence of the chancellor's recommendatory letter. In 1722,
he was ordained by William Talbot, then bishop of Durham,
who presented him to the living of Houghton-le-Spring.
While in London, Seeker had been a frequent visitor
at the house shared by Edward Talbot's widow and
Catherine Benson, sister of Martin Benson. On October 28,
1725, he married Catherine Benson, to whom he had become
deeply attached. At the earnest desire of Seeker and his wife,
Mrs. Talbot and her young daughter consented to make their
home with them.2
As rector of Houghton-le-Spring, where he was very popular
with his country neighbours, Seeker spent the happiest years
of his life. The dampness of the situation, however, seriously
affected Mrs. Seeker's health, and in 1727, he was forced on
that account to exchange the living for the rectory of Ryton,
with a prebend at Durham. In July 1732, he was made a
royal chaplain, and in the following August preached before
Queen Caroline at the Chapel Royal, St. James's, during the
king's absence abroad. Her Majesty afterwards sent for
Seeker and expressed approval of his sermon ; at this interview
he took the opportunity of recommending his friend Joseph
Butler to the queen.3
In the following year Seeker was presented to the rectory
of St. James's, Piccadilly, and in 1734 was nominated bishop
of Bristol by the king. As the revenue attached to this see
was small, he was permitted to retain the rectory of St. James's
and the prebend at Durham. His " Lectures on the Church
Catechism " delivered at this time to his parishioners at St.
James's were very popular, and were afterwards published in
two volumes.
Frederick, Prince of Wales, who since his quarrel with his
1 Ibid. 3 Ibid.
382 . .
Thomas Seeker
father had resided at Norfolk House in the parish of St.
James's, attended divine service regularly at that church.
Seeker baptized all his Highness's children except two. His
influence with the prince being supposed greater than it
actually was, he was employed by King George II. to bring
about a reconciliation between him and his son. His attempts
to do so having failed, he thereby incurred the king's dis-
pleasure through no fault of his own. [After he became
archbishop, Seeker was consulted much less frequently
by the crown than any archbishop had been for many years.
On one flagrant occasion his claims were ignored in such a
manner that he was advised by his friends to show some
resentment. He assured them that though " he had as sharp
a sense of the indignity as any of them, he was unwilling to
break altogether with the court, for then he was certain he
could prevail in nothing ; he might now be able to carry some
points for the good of the Church."4]
In 1737, Seeker was translated to the see of Oxford. In the
House of Lords he manifested an earnest desire to support all
measures which concerned the public good. In 1743, a bill
was introduced to lower the duties on spirituous liquors.
Seeker led the bishops in opposition to this bill, declaring that
they " could not sacrifice for ways and means the health,
the industry and the lives of the people." Later he supported
a bill for making provision for the widows and children of
ministers of the Established Church of Scotland. In 1753,
he spoke on the side of moderation in the question of repealing
the J e ws Naturalization Bill . In the following year he brought
upon himself much wrath from nonconformists and New
Englanders for urgently advocating the consecration of one or
more bishops for America.5 While he was a kind friend to
foreign Protestants, his precise temperament was greatly
offended by the extravagance of the Methodists. He, how-
ever, thoroughly appreciated the work they were doing, and
in his charges frequently brought them before the clergy for
example and instruction. In a charge to his clergy in 1750,
Seeker deplored the dreary spectacle of neglect presented by
the country churches throughout his diocese. For years
« Overton and Relton, The English Church, p. 123.
J Charles J. Abbey, The English Church, Vol. II., p. 46.
383
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
only enough had been done to prevent them from falling
into ruin. The floors were meanly paved, the walls dirty
and patched, and the interior often damp, offensive and
unwholesome.
While at Oxford Seeker occasionally visited Sarah, Duchess
of Marlborough, at Blenheim. He is said to have always
spoken his mind to her openly, however much he differed
from her, and in spite of her domineering temper she bore
it for the most part patiently. She appointed him one of the
executors of her will, and he officiated at her funeral in October,
1744.6
In the spring of 1748 Mrs. Seeker died, leaving no issue.
During the frequent illnesses to which she was subject her
husband had nursed her with the greatest care and tenderness.
In 1750, Seeker was made dean of St. Paul's, in succession to
his friend Butler, who had been chosen bishop of Durham.
He then resigned the rectory of St. James's and the prebend
at Durham.
On the death of Archbishop Hutton, in 1758, Seeker was
promoted to the see of Canterbury. George II. had become
reconciled to him shortly before his death, and the new arch-
bishop was on friendly terms with George III., whom he had
baptized, married and crowned. His weak health, however,
prevented him from being much at court. His preaching,
which was plain and practic al,attractedm any hearers . Bishop
Porteus, his biographer, says that his sermons were much
admired for their manly sense, useful directions, and frequent
applications of Scripture. Bishop Hurd of Worcester, however,
declared that there was sometimes an air of cant in his ex-
pressions, derived no doubt from his early breeding and
education. Horace Walpole, who detested him, said that his
sermons were a kind of moral essays, but what they wanted
of the gospel was made up by a tone of fanaticism which they
still retained.7
As a bishop, Seeker commanded from his clergy respect
rather than any warmer feeling. He was somewhat stiff,
formal and precise in manner, and often seemed reserved and
cold. Porteus states that this was often due to bodily pain
6 Beilby Porteus, Introduction to the Works of Archbishop Seeker.
7 Charles. J. Abbey, The English Church, II., 44.
384
Thomas Seeker
and depression, and that faults were hence laid to his charge
which did not really belong to his character. His Grace was
in person tall and comely. His house was hospitable, and his
table plentiful, yet plain and simple. He was an excellent
classical scholar, and so well-skilled in Hebrew that there
were few books published in his time in the Hebrew language
which were not sent to him for revision. He is also said to
have revised the manuscript of Butler's " Analogy."
In the spring of 1768, he was seized with violent pain in the
upper part of the thigh. This continued without relief until
a few days before his death, when a strange accident befel him.
As he was turning himself on his couch he broke his thigh
bone. It was found impossible to set it, and after suffering
great agony he died on August 3, 1768. After his death it
was found that the thigh bone was quite carious, and that
the excruciating pains he had long felt were due to the gradual
corrosion of the bone by some acrimonious humour.8 He
was buried as he had desired, without monument or epitaph,
in the covered passage leading from a private door of Lambeth
Palace to the north side of the church.
His printed works include : (1) Five charges delivered
to his clergy as bishop of Oxford. (2) Three charges delivered
as archbishop of Canterbury. (4) Instructions to candidates
for ordination. (5) Thirty-nine lectures on the Church
Catechism. (6) Numerous letters and pamphlets. His
episcopal charges were on the whole, with respect to the views
expressed, much in advance of those of the same period.
Nichols' Lit. Illust., Vol. III., p. 477.
385
85.— FREDERICK CORNWALLIS, 1768 to 1783.
King of England : George III., 1760 to 1820.
Frederick Cornwallis, the seventh son of Charles, fourth
Lord Cornwallis, was the first primate of high birth since the
days of Cardinal Pole. He was born on February 22, 171 3,
and was twin brother of General Edward Cornwallis, whom,
as a boy, he so much resembled that it was difficult to know
the brothers apart. Frederick was educated at Eton, whence
he proceeded to Christ's College, Cambridge, where he became
a fellow, graduating B.A. in 1736, and D.D. in 1748.1
While a student at Cambridge, he had a slight paralytic
stroke, and never fully recovered the use of his right side, being
thus obliged throughout his life to write with his left hand.
After his ordination he was presented by his brother with
two country livings in Norfolk and Suffolk. The influence of
his family ensured for him rapid preferment, and before 1747
he was made a royal chaplain, a canon of Windsor, and a
prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral. In February 1750, he was
consecrated bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. During
the years he held this office he was much beloved and respected
by the clergy of his diocese. In 1766, he was made dean of
St. Paul's, and in August 1768, succeeded Archbishop Seeker
in the see of Canterbury. His promotion was resented by
many who did not consider him a man of sufficiently high mark
to fill so eminent a position. He, however, possessed
moderation with a general aptitude for winning popularity
and esteem, and was elegant, courteous and essentially a
man of the world.2 He was no sooner installed at Lambeth
than he abolished the custom of having separate tables for
the chaplains, and invited them to dine as his companions
at his own board. This alteration of an ancient custom
1 Gentleman's Magazine, 1783, Vol. LIIL, p. 233.
1 Charles J. Abbey, The English Church, II., 205.
386
Frederick Cornwallis
could not without considerable difficulty have come from one
who was not himself of high birth.
In February 1759, Dr. Cornwallis had married Caroline,
daughter of William Townshend, third son of Charles, second
Viscount Townsend. She survived him until 181 1, but had no
issue. At Lambeth Mrs. Cornwallis shone as a leader of
society, eclipsing everybody by the splendour and magnificence
of her equipages and entertainments. She gave several large
balls and convivial routs at the Palace, and had drawn satirical
observations from many quarters. Selina, Countess of Hunting-
don, whose chief aim in life was to bring about a revival in
religion among the upper classes, sought a private interview
with the king on the subject of the routs, and George III. wrote
to the archbishop the following severe reprimand : " I hold
these levities and vain dissipations as utterly inexpedient, if
not unlawful, to pass in a residence for many centuries devoted
to divine studies, religious retirement and the extensive exercise
of charity and benevolence — a place where so many of your
predecessors have led their lives in such sanctity as has thrown
lustre on the pure religion they professed and adorned. I
trust you will suppress them immediately, so that I may not
have occasion to show any further marks of my displeasure
or to interpose in a different manner."3
In July 1778, his Grace, assisted by the bishop of Rochester,
made a visitation of the eastern portion of his province, visit-
ing Sittingbourne, Canterbury, Ashford, Ramsgate, Sandwich,
Dover, Hythe, Romsey, Cranbrook and Maidstone. During
his stay at Dover, at the London Tavern, the archbishop and
his lady were much alarmed at midnight by the door of their
chamber being burst open by a drunken English squire just
arrived from France, who insisted on taking possession of their
apartment, which his Grace for the sake of peace resigned.
Next morning, when sober, the gentleman offered to make
any submission, but his Grace refused to see him.4
Archbishop Cornwallis was a man of liberal views, and in
the House of Lords always spoke warmly in favour of tolera-
tion, towards both dissenters and Roman Catholics. Though
his views changed at a later date, he was at one time much in
3 Overton and Relton, The English Church, p. 162.
4 Gentleman's Magazine, 1778, Vol. LVIIL, p. 73.
387
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
favour of a revision of Church formularies. His biographer
adds that he was very charitable, an earnest peacemaker, and
kind and generous in his superintendence of the clergy.
He died at Lambeth Palace on March 19, 1783, after a
few day's illness, and was buried in a vault under the com-
munion table in Lambeth Church. He improved Lambeth
Palace and added to the gallery many portraits of his pre-
decessors.
388
86.— JOHN MOORE, 1783 to 1805.
King of England : George III., 1760 to 1820.
On the death of Archbishop Cornwallis, the king offered the
primacy to Robert Lowth, Bishop of London, one of the most
distinguished churchmen of his time, but he declined it on the
plea of advanced age. It was then offered to Bishop Hurd,
of Worcester, a brilliant scholar, but for " love of lettered
ease " he also declined it. It is said that his Majesty then
desired each of these prelates to recommend to him one of the
bishops as the fittest in their judgment to fill the metropolitan
chair, and they both, without any previous knowledge of
each other's opinions, named Dr. Moore, Bishop of Bangor.
According to most of his biographers, John Moore was the
son of a butcher of Gloucester. Recent investigation, how-
ever, has shown that the elder Moore was more probably a
respectable grazier.1 John was born at Gloucester in January
1730, and received his early education at the free school of
his native city. There he obtained a scholarship for Pembroke
College, Oxford, where he entered in 1745. Three years
later he graduated B.A. and proceeded M.A. in 1751.
In spite of his undoubted talents, Moore, after taking orders,
had no higher prospect than that of a country curacy, when a
fortunate incident unexpectedly opened the way for his prefer-
ment. Mr. Bliss, the Savilian professor of geometry and
astronomer royal at Oxford, was in the habit of visiting the
second Duke of Marlborough at Blenheim. On one of these
occasions the duke requested Mr. Bliss to recommend a young
man as private tutor to his younger sons, Lords Charles and
Robert Spencer. While Bliss was endeavouring in vain to
recollect a qualified person, young Moore happened to be
strolling in the park. He was of the same college as the
professor, who entertained for him a sincere respect and who
immediately recommended him to the duke. Moore was
accordingly summoned, and very readily accepted the post.
1 Charles J. Abbey, The English Church, II., 207.
389
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
The pride of the duchess would not permit her son's tutor
to dine in her presence, and Moore was accordingly obliged to
to put up with a place at the second table. Strange to say,
however, Moore made such rapid progress in the esteem and
affection of the duchess, that in a short time she found herself
unable to dine without him. When she became a widow she
is said to have offered him her hand in marriage, but he
prudently declined the honour, thereby winning the esteem
of the family. So sensible was the duke of his honourable
conduct, that he is said to have settled an annuity of £400 on
him, and also procured for him valuable Church preferment.2
Moore received a prebend at Durham, a canonry at Christ
Church, Oxford, and in 1771, after taking the degrees of B.D.
and D.D., was made dean of Canterbury.
In February 1775, he was consecrated bishop of Bangor.
His removal to Bangor occasioned the following witticism,
entitled " A Word of Comfort from Bangor to Canterbury
on the loss of her Dean " : —
" Cease, Canterbury, to deplore
The loss of your accomplished Moore,
Repining at my gain,
I soon may have most cause to mourn,
To you he'll probably return,
With me will scarce remain." — Bangor,
which was thus answered :
" To me, you prophesy, our mitred Moore
Revolving years may probably restore,
And thus in vain attempt my tears to dry :
1 scarcely know my masters but by name,
Triennial visits and the voice of fame,
For ah ! my palaces in ruins lie I " — Canterbury.3
This prophecy was fulfilled when on April 26, 1783,
Moore was translated to the see of Canterbury. At the
same time he became, in virtue of his office a lord of
Trade and Plantations, president of the Corporation of
2 Public Characters, 1798-99, p. 276.
1 Nichols' Literary Anecdotes, VIII., p. 94.
390
John Moore
the Sons of the Clergy and of the Society for the
Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, a trustee of
the British Museum, a governor of the Charter House, visitor
of All Soul's and Merton Colleges, Oxford, and a member of
his Majesty's most honourable privy council. Archbishop
Moore was a zealous supporter of Sunday schools and took a
deep interest in all missionary enterprise. In 1787 he con-
secrated two missionary bishops in Lambeth chapel, one for
North America and the other for Nova Scotia. During his
primacy the Church Missionary Society and the Religious
Tract Society were founded (1799).
Moore is said to have exercised undue influence over King
George III. during his periods of mental disorder. Abbey
describes him as " a worthy religious-minded man of business-
like habits, but in no way remarkable." In his prosperity he
was not forgetful of his family, and he placed his aged father,
who had failed in business, in a position of independence.
Moore married twice, his first wife being a daughter of Robert
Wright, Chief Justice of South Carolina, and sister of Sir James
Wright, resident at Vienna ; his second wife was Catherine,
a very celebrated beauty, daughter of Sir Robert Eden, Bart.,
of West Auckland. By her he had a large family of children,
of whom four sons survived him. He died at Lambeth Palace
on January 18, 1805, and was buried in Lambeth Church.
391
87.—CHARLES MANNERS-SUTTON, 1805 to 1828.
Kings of England : George III., 1760 to 1820.
George IV., 1820 to 1830.
Charles Manners-Sutton, born on February 14, 1755, was
the grandson of John, third Duke of Rutland, K.G., and fourth
son of Lord George Manners-Sutton, who assumed the name
of Sutton on inheriting the estates of his maternal grandfather.
His mother was Diana, daughter of Thomas Chaplin, of
Blankney, in Lincolnshire. He was educated at the Charter-
house and at Emmanuel College, Cambridge. In 1777, he
graduated B.A. as fifteenth wrangler, his brother, Lord
Thomas Manners-Sutton, being at the same time fifth
wrangler.1 He proceeded M.A. in 1780 and D.D. in 1792.
After taking orders he was presented by his brother to the
family living of Averham-with-Kelham, in Northamptonshire,
and by the Duke of Rutland to that of Whitwell in Derby-
shire. The influence of his family secured him rapid prefer-
ment. In 1791 he was appointed dean of Peterborough, and
in the following year was consecrated bishop of Norwich.
He then resigned his other preferments, but the deanery of
Windsor was conferred on him in commendam. At Windsor
he was brought into close intimacy with the royal family,
with whom he and his wife, Mary, the daughter of Thomas
Thoroton, of Screveton, Nottinghamshire, were great
favourites.
On the death of Archbishop Moore it was expected that
Bishop Tomline, of Lincoln, who had been Pitt's private tutor
at Cambridge, would succeed to the see of Canterbury. But
directly the news of Moore's death reached the king at
Windsor, he drove down to the deanery, and calling the dean
away from the dining table, where he was entertaining a party
of friends, he took him by both hands and greeted him : " My
Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, I wish you joy. No, not a
1 Annual Register, 1828, p. 248.
392
Charles Manners-Sutton
word, go back to your friends." Next morning Pitt arrived
at Windsor to urge the appointment of his friend Tomline on
the king. " It can't be, it can't be," said the king, " I have
already wished Manners-Sutton joy, and he must go to
Canterbury."2
While bishop of Norwich, his lavish expenditure and the
claims of a large family had involved him seriously in debt.
But he was no sooner raised to the archbishopric than he satis-
fied all the claims against him, and so carefully did he manage
the revenues of his see that in his hands they were raised from
£12,000 to £20,000 per annum. On his elevation he found an
accumulation from the sale of the old archiepiscopal palace
at Croydon. With this he purchased a new country palace
at Addington, near Croydon.
Archbishop Manners-Sutton showed himself distinctly
hostile to the claims of the Roman Catholics and opposed the
motions brought forward in their favour in 1805. On several
occasions, however, he supported bills in favour of the Pro-
testant dissenters. He officiated at the coronation of George
IV. and at the marriages of the Princess Charlotte, the Dukes
of Clarence, Cumberland, Cambridge and Gloucester, and the
Princess Elizabeth.
The primacy of Manners-Sutton was marked by a great
revival of life and energy throughout the Church of England.
For some years the evangelical party had prevailed, but the
archbishop threw all the weight of his great influence on the
side of the orthodox or High Church party. He chose for
his chaplains men who were taking a leading part in the work
of revival, namely, Christopher Wordsworth (brother of the
poet), afterwards Master of Trinity College, Cambridge,
Richard Mant, afterwards Bishop of Down and Connor,
Archdeacon Cambridge, and Dr. D'Oyly.3
On October 16, 1811, the archbishop took the chair at the
first meeting of the National Society, founded for the purpose
of establishing National Schools for the education of the
children of the poor. A very great share in the success of
the undertaking must be attributed to him. On February 6,
1 81 8, he presided at the first meeting of the Church Building
2 J. Cave-Browne, Lambeth Palace, p. 165.
' J. H. Overton, The English Church in the Nineteenth Century.
393
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Society, which had been founded to raise funds for repairing
churches.
The archbishop never hesitated to speak in the House of
Lords when ecclesiastical subjects formed the topic of debate,
but he made a rule of abstaining from speech in questions
of secular policy.* He was described as a man of mild but
imposing presence ; his voice was full and tunable, his
eloquence effective, his arguments weighty, his knowledge
comprehensive and his judgment sound. He was of the most
humane disposition, very munificent in his charities, very
diligent in the discharge of his high dignity, and altogether
exemplary in the relations of life as husband, father,
brother and friend. To his clergy he was of easy access, ever
ready to attend to their business and requests.
Archbishop Davidson says of him : " He was a man of
ancient lineage and of stately presence, of sound, quiet judg-
ment and straightforward religious life, but so far as the
ordinary records of him show, with no specially hot enthu-
siasms, and no obvious breadth of sympathy.5
For a considerable period during which Archbishop Manners-
Sutton was at the head of the Church of England, his brother
was Chancellor of Ireland, and his son Speaker of the House
of Commons. He died at Lambeth Palace on July 21, 1828,
and was buried in a family vault which had been constructed
under Addington Church six months previously. His wife,
by whom he had two sons and ten daughters, survived him.
Henry Charles Manners-Sutton, fourth Viscount Canterbury,
is descended from Charles, eldest son of Archbishop Manners-
Sutton.
4 Annual Register, 1828, p. 249.
s Five Archbishops, p. 8.
394
ARCHBISHOP HOWLEY.
88.— WILLIAM HOWLEY, 1828 to 1848.
Sovereigns of England : George IV., 1820 to 1830.
William IV., 1830 to 1837.
Victoria, 1837 to 1901.
William Howley was born at Ropley, near Alresford, in
Hampshire, on February 12, 1766, and was the only son of the
Rev. William Howley, D.D., Vicar of Bishops Sutton and
Ropley. He was educated at Winchester School, where he
gained two prizes given by Lord Rivers for English verse.
In 1783, he proceeded to New College, Oxford, where he was
elected a fellow two years later, graduating B.A. in 1787,
and M.A. in 1791. In 1794 he was elected a fellow of Win-
chester College, and held successively the livings of Bishops
Sutton, Andover and Bradford Peverell. In 1804 he was
made a canon of Christ Church, Oxford, and proceeded to the
degrees of B.D. and D.D. At Oxford, Howley was tutor to the
Prince of Orange (afterwards King of Holland), and to the
Marquis of Abercorn.1 In 1809 he was made Regius Pro-
fessor of Divinity, and on October 10, 1813, was consecrated
bishop of London at Lambeth Palace. Queen Charlotte,
the consort of George III., though now upwards of seventy,
had never witnessed the consecration of a bishop, and her
Majesty, accompanied by two of the princesses, was present
at the ceremony.
On the death of Archbishop Manners-Sutton, in 1828, Howley
was nominated to the primacy by the Duke of Wellington,
who was then Prime Minister. Many people declared that his
elevation to Canterbury could be traced to the support he had
given in 1820 to the Pains and Penalties Bill against Queen
Caroline. At that time he had laid it down with much em-
phasis that the king could do no wrong either morally or
politically. This secured for him the support of that selfish
sensualist George IV.2 Eight months after his translation to
1 Gentleman's Magazine, 1848, Vol. XXIX., Part I., p. 426.
2 Times, February 12, 1848.
395
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Canterbury, Howley voted against the Emancipation Bill of
1829, which restored to Roman Catholics the full rights and
privileges of citizens. His conservative principles also
caused him to oppose the Reform Bill of 1832, though later
he acquiesced in the passing of this measure.
In 1831, Archbishop Howley crowned King William IV. He
was on excellent terms with the royal family, and officiated at
all the royal baptisms, weddings and funerals which took
place during his primacy. In 1836, a Royal Commission
was appointed to enquire into the exact conditions of the
ecclesiastical revenues. It was found that while in some
cases princely incomes were attached to certain sees, for others
the stipend was miserably inadequate. The Commission
abolished pluralities and fixed the income of sees, reducing
considerably that of Canterbury.
William IV. died before daybreak on June 20, 1837, at
Windsor Castle, and at five in the morning Archbishop Howley,
accompanied by the Marquis of Conyingham, the Lord
Chamberlain, arrived at Kensington Palace, where the Princess
Victoria was then residing with her mother, to inform her of
her accession. They had some difficulty in awaking the
sleeping household, but were at length admitted to a waiting-
room. The attendants of the princess were most unwilling
to arouse her from sleep, and only consented to do so on
learning that the archbishop and his companion had come on
business of urgent importance. Victoria came to them in a
loose white nightgown, a shawl thrown over her shoulders,
and her hair hanging down. At the words, " Your Majesty,"
her eyes filled with tears, but she received the news of her
accession with grave dignity. On June 28, 1838, Archbishop
Howley crowned Queen Victoria in Westminster Abbey.
The Oxford movement, which, in its first stages, represented
a natural re-action against the evangelicism that had long
predominated in the Church, commenced shortly after Howley 's
elevation to the primacy. Though he took little active part
in the movement, he was in full sympathy with it, and was
kept in touch with the great leaders Keble, Newman and
Pusey by his chaplain and confidential friend, the Rev. Hugh
James Rose. An address signed by 7,000 clergy was pre-
sented to the primate expressing the determination to preserve
396
William Howley
inviolate the doctrines, services and discipline of the Church
of England. A lay address immediately followed signed by
230,000 heads of families. The archbishop received these
addresses courteously and, speaking with caution, declared
that he anticipated beneficial results from the public
declarations of clergy and laity. The secessions to Rome which
took place later were a severe blow to many loyal churchmen,
but sufficed to cool much unhealthy ardour. The effect of
the movement was too deep-seated to be permanently injured
by these secessions. It had taught Englishmen to look on
the Church of England as a great historic institution possess-
ing unbroken continuance, and agreement in doctrine with the
ancient Church.3
In 1 841 the King of Prussia offered to subscribe £15,000
towards a fund for supporting a bishop in Jerusalem, whose
successors were to be nominated alternately by the crowns of
England and Prussia. The offer was accepted, and in
November Archbishop Howley consecrated a bishop for
Jerusalem in Lambeth Palace. This roused great indignation
among the leaders of the Oxford movement, who declared
that Howley had ignored the spiritual jurisdiction of the
bishop of the Eastern Church.
That this accusation was in a great measure unjust is proved
by a letter addressed to the Eastern Patriarchs by Archbishop
Howley, dated Lambeth, November 23, 1841, in which he
says : "In order to prevent any misunderstanding in regard
to this our purpose, we think it right to make known unto you
that we have charged the said bishop our brother not to inter-
meddle in any way with the jurisdiction of the prelates and
other ecclesiastical dignitaries of the East, but to show them
due reverence, and to be ready on all occasions and by all
means in his power to promote a mutual interchange of respect,
courtesy and kindness. . . Our hearty desire is to renew
that amicable intercourse with the ancient churches of the
East which has been suspended for ages, and which, if
restored, may have the effect of putting an end to divisions
which have brought the most grievous calamities on the
Church of Christ."*
3 Dean Spence's Hist, of the Church of England, IV., 367.
■» Geo. William, B.D., The Orthodox Church of the East, p. xli.
397
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
In 1847, Dr. Hampden, the Regius Prof essor of Divinity at
Oxford, was nominated to the bishopric of Hereford. His
appointment was violently opposed by many of the bishops
on the ground that his writings were tinged with unorthodoxy,
and also because he had shown sympathy with the dissenters.
Archbishop Howley refrained from signing the memorial
of the remonstrant bishops, and declined to pronounce any
definite opinion on the matter. The appointment was con-
firmed, but the controversy roused much bitter feeling.
Howley died before the consecration of Hampden, which
took place at Lambeth Palace on March 26, 1848,
Archbishop Sumner officiating.
In addressing public assemblies Howley lacked both force
and fluency. He possessed a very amiable temper, and a
large fund of common sense. He took a deep interest in
missionary enterprise, and in the work of the National Society
for establishing Schools for the Poor (vide Charles Manners-
Sutton). During his primacy, twelve new bishops were con-
secrated for British colonies. He was a great builder and had
excellent taste in architecture. At Lambeth Palace he erected
at a cost of £60,000, half of which was paid out of his private
income, the imposing wing which extends eastward from
Cranmer's Tower. He also restored the chapel and converted
the old dining-hall known as Juxon's Hall into a library.5
Though he wrote little himself, he was a remarkably competent
judge of literary work, particularly in the domain of theology.6
His printed works consist chiefly of charges and sermons. He
edited " Sonnets and Miscellaneous Poems " by Thomas
Russell, Fellow of New College, Oxford.
Archbishop Howley died at Lambeth Palace on February 11 ,
1848. Had he lived until the following day, he would have
completed his eighty-second year. He was buried at Adding-
ton, near Croydon. In 1805, ne had married Mary Frances,
daughter of John Belli, of Southampton, by whom he had
two sons and three daughters. Both his sons predeceased
him. Mrs. Howley survived him until i860. Archbishop
Davidson says of Howley : "He was a cultured scholar, a
trained theologian, a clear thinker and a man of transparent
s J. Cave-Browne, Lambeth Palace, p. 167.
6 Overton's English Church in the Nineteenth Century, p. 179.
398
William Howley
and irradiating piety of personal character. . . The
personal devotion which he evoked on the part of all who were
with him in his daily work was equalled in a really notable
way by the impression of personal holiness which he left upon
the minds of those with whom he came into more occasional
touch. One of the foremost men in modern Scottish history,
Dr. Chalmers, the great Presbyterian divine, founder of the
Free Church of Scotland, has recorded the feeling with which
he came from the presence of Archbishop Howley, after an
evening spent with him at Lambeth, at a time of high and
heated controversy. ' I could think of nothing,' he says,
' but the description given in the Book of Daniel of those
" upon whose bodies the fire had no power, nor was an hair
of their head singed, nor the smell of fire had passed on
them." ' "7
7 Five Archbishops, pp. i-ii.
399
8g.~ JOHN BIRD SUMNER, 1848 to 1862.
Queen of England: Victoria, 1837 to 1901.
John Bird Sumner was born on February 25, 1780, and
was the eldest son of the Rev. Robert Sumner, vicar of Kenil-
worth. He was educated at Eton College and at King's
College, Cambridge, where he had a distinguished university
career, and was elected a fellow in 1801. He graduated B.A.
in 1803, afterwards proceeding to the degrees of M.A. (1807),
and D.D. (1809). On leaving Cambridge, he became
assistant master at Eton. After his ordination he resigned
his fellowship, and married Marianne, daughter of George
Robertson, of Edinburgh, a captain in the Royal Navy.
In 1817, he was elected a fellow of Eton College, and
was soon afterwards nominated to the rectory of Maple
Durham, in Oxfordshire. At this period he devoted much
time to literary work. His " Apostolical Preaching considered
in an Examination of St. Paul's Epistles " was first published
in 1815, and in the following year he wrote "A Treatise on the
Records of the Creation and the Moral Attributes of the
Creator." The latter work, which went through seven
editions, obtained for him one of the Burnett prizes amounting
to £400.x
His writings won the approval of Shute Barrington, Bishop
of Durham, who appointed him to a prebend in Durham
Cathedral. In 1828 the Duke of Wellington nominated
him to the bishopric of Chester. His younger brother,
Charles Richard Sumner, who had been consecrated bishop
of Llandaff in 1826, and translated to the see of Winchester in
the following year, was one of his consecrators.
At Chester, where Sumner had two hundred and fifty-five
parishes under his care, he worked nobly and indefatigably,
building churches, founding schools, and doing all in his power
to make the Church of England the church of the people. His
1 Times, September 8, 1862.
400
John Bird Sumner
task was no easy one, for as a missionary bishop to new and
overgrown populations he had to contend against wealthy
indifference and obstinate heathenism. After twenty years'
service in the manufacturing districts, Bishop Sumner was
translated to the primacy on the death of Dr. Howleyin 1848.
The Tories had raised him to the see of Chester, but it was
the Whigs, under the leadership of Lord John Russell, who
nominated him to the primacy.
At this time a violent dispute agitated the Anglican
Church. In the spring of 1847, the Rev. George Cornelius
Gorham, vicar of St. Just, in the diocese of Exeter, had
been nominated by the Lord Chancellor to the benefice
of Brampford Speke, in the same diocese. Gorham was
a distinguished scholar and a fellow of Trinity College,
Cambridge, but Dr. Phillpotts, Bishop of Exeter, refused to
institute him on the ground that his views on baptismal
regeneration were not in agreement with those of the
Church of England. Much interest was excited in the case,
and many pamphlets published. The evangelical party, who
were believed to hold the same opinions as Mr. Gorham,
were challenged to declare their position and to justify their
loyalty to the Prayer Book. Gorham's case was referred to
the Privy Council, and the judges declared that in their
opinion his statements might be interpreted in a sense not
contrary to the Prayer Book.
In this judgment the archbishops of Canterbury and York
concurred. Many who did not agree with Gorham's views
rejoiced in the result of the trial, for they saw that if the
Anglican Church was to reflect fairly and freely the fullest
truth it must be the home of more than one school of thought.
Gorham took possession of his benefice, but the controversy
continued to rage for some time.3 Bishop Phillpotts, who was
described as the most advanced and militant high churchman
of his age, addressed to Archbishop Sumner a violent letter
which concluded with these words : " I do hereby solemnly
protest before the Church of England, before the Holy Catholic
Church, before Him who is its Divine Head, against your
giving mission to exercise cure of souls within my diocese
1 A Popular Hist, of the Church of England, by William Boyd
Carpenter, pp. 434-436.
401
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
to a clergyman who proclaims himself to hold the opinions
which Mr. Gorham holds. I protest that anyone who gives
mission to him till he retract is a favourer and supporter of
these heresies. I protest in conclusion that I cannot without
sin, and by God's grace I will not, hold communion with him,
be he who he may, who shall so abuse the high commission
which he bears."3 This letter was printed and passed through
twenty-one editions.
The revival of Convocation, which met for business for the
first time for 135 years on November 12, 1852 (vide William
Wake), was not a measure of the archbishop's personal choice.
He had in fact opposed its revival from apprehension lest the
meetings should lead to further disputes. He, however, threw
himself with great zeal into the duties thus imposed on him.
Though not an influential president, he had experience and
much personal kindliness.
In i860, appeared the famous book entitled " Essays
and Reviews." It contained seven papers, six of which
were written by Anglican clergymen of position and
ability. Though there was little said in the book which
would excite much opposition to-day, it was alleged that the
writers threw doubt on the genuineness of at least half the
books in the Bible. Two of the writers, the Rev. H. B. Wilson,
vicar of Great Houghton, and Rev. Dr. Rowland Williams,
vicar of Broad Chalk, in the diocese of Salisbury, were selected
for prosecution and were condemned by the Court of Arches.
The Privy Council, to whom appeal was made, reversed this
decision, but the majority of the bishops unhesitatingly
condemned the book. A declaration was drawn up at Oxford
signed by 11,000 Anglican clergy, and presented to Archbishop
Sumner, maintaining without reserve or qualification the
inspiration of the canonical Scriptures/ A few weeks later
" Essays and Reviews " was condemned by both Houses of
the Convocation of Canterbury.
Archbishop Sumner vehemently opposed the proposal
for a revision of the liturgy, and voted against the bill
for legalizing marriage with a deceased wife's sister. He
died at Addington on September 6, 1862. It is recorded
» A Letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Murray's edition, p. 90.
« Dean Spence's Hist, of the Church of England, Vol. IV., pp. 421-423.
402
John Bird Sumner
that Bishop Phillpotts, on hearing that his aged opponent
lay on his death-bed, sent him a kindly message, to
which Sumner heartily responded. He was buried in
Addington churchyard. He was survived by his wife, two
sons and several daughters. Sumner was a finished scholar,
and a fluent writer. Amiable, bright and sincere, he made
few enemies. " He upheld with steady and sometimes
courageous consistency the splendid evangelical principles
of the best sort."5
His works in addition to those already mentioned include :
(i) A series of sermons on the Christian Faith and Char-
acter, 1821. (2) The Evidences of Christianity, 1824.
(3) Christian Charity, its obligations and objects, 1841. Two
books of sermons. He also wrote a series of expositions on
the four Gospels, the Acts and the Epistles of the New Testa-
ment published between 1831 and 1857, and contributed to
the " Encyclopaedia Britannica " (Supplement 1824, Vol. vi.)
an article on the Poor Laws. In this he showed a thorough
knowledge of the subject.
5 Five Archbishops, by Archbishop Davidson, p. 11.
403
90.— CHARLES THOMAS LONGLEY, 1862 to 1868.
Queen of England : Victoria, 1837 to 190 1.
Charles Thomas Longley was born at Boley Hill, Rochester,
on July 28, 1794. His father, John Longley, well known as
a political writer, and author of the two tracts " On Trial
DY Jury " and " The Complete Representation of the People,"
was for many years recorder of Rochester, and sat as one of
the magistrates of the Thames Police Court.
After spending some years at a private school at Cheam,
Surrey, Charles Longley was elected a king's scholar at
Westminster. His name may still be seen carved with his
own hand on one side of the oaken panels of the Westminster
dormitory. In 1812, he proceeded to Christ Church, Oxford,
where he graduated B.A. in 1815, with First Class Honours
in Classics, and M.A. in 1818. He was afterwards tutor and
censor of his college, and served the university as proctor.
He also acted as public examiner in the classical schools.1
In 1818, he took holy orders and was appointed curate at
Cowley, near Oxford. The incumbent, Thomas Vowler
Short, had been Longley's fellow pupil at Westminster. On
Short's promotion to the see of St. Asaph, Longley succeeded
him as incumbent of Cowley. In 1827, he was nominated a
preacher at Whitehall, and rector of Tytherley, in Hampshire.
Two years later he proceeded B.D. and D.D., and was soon
afterwards called from his quiet country parsonage to be
headmaster of Harrow School. While there he turned out
some excellent scholars, and considerably raised the numbers.
His career at Harrow would, however, have been more
successful had he been gifted with greater strictness as a
disciplinarian.2
In 1836 the new diocese of Ripon was founded in order
to relieve the overgrown see of York from some portion
of its increased responsibilities in the manufacturing
1 Times, October 29, 1868. 2 Ibid.
404
Charles Thomas Longley
districts. Lord Melbourne looked for a man of Liberal
opinions, and yet one whose appointment to the episcopal
bench would not be likely to offend the Tory and High Church
clergy. He accordingly chose Longley, who, in 1831, had
increased his chances of preferment by marrying Caroline
Sophia, eldest child of the well-known reformer Sir Henry
Brooke Parnell, afterwards Lord Congleton. On leaving
Harrow the bishop-elect preached an affectionate farewell
sermon, which was afterwards printed at the request of the
boys to whom it was addressed.3
The dislike of William IV. for the Whig Party was well
known. When Longley did homage to the king for the see
of Ripon, he had no sooner risen from his knees after taking
the solemn oath than William thus addressed him in a loud
voice : "Bishop of Ripon, I charge you as you shall answer
before Almighty God that you never by word or deed give
encouragement to those d d Whigs who would upset the
Church of England."
The Liberal party had opposed the bill for the erection of the
see of Ripon, but Longley's firm and consistent conduct soon
disarmed all opposition, and changed intended foes into fast
and firm friends.
The diocese of Ripon presented a striking contrast to the
scholarly atmosphere of Harrow and Oxford. The dense
populations engaged in mining and manufacturing, the scattered
hamlets, the hard-headed, hard-handed character of the people,
were circumstances which rendered the work of the bishop
peculiarly arduous and anxious.4 Longley laboured with cease-
less energy, and caused many additional churches and schools
to be erected, raising for this purpose the Diocesan Church
Extension Fund.
A remarkable episode occurred during his episcopate in
the north. The clergy of St. Saviour's, Leeds, had adopted a
number of Romish practices to which the bishop was strongly
opposed, and he refused to consecrate the church until altera-
tions were made in the ritual. Although there was at first
a formal compliance with his wishes, a system of evasion was
subsequently adopted. Longley exhibited great firmness
3 Ibid.
4 F. Arnold, Our Bishops and Deans, Vol. I., p. 165.
405
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
in the matter and insisted on obedience, but his worst fears
were realized when the incumbent and four of the clergy of
St. Saviour's went over to the Church of Rome.5
In Mrs. Gaskell's " Life of Charlotte Bronte " there is a letter
from the gifted authoress in which she describes a visit paid
by Bishop Longley to her father's modest parsonage at
Haworth. " The bishop has been and gone," she writes.
" He is certainly a most charming bishop, the most benignant
gentleman that ever put on lawn sleeves, yet stately too and
competent to check encroachments. It is all very well to
talk of receiving a bishop without trouble, but you must pre-
pare for him. The house was a good deal put out of its way
as you may suppose. All passed, however, quietly, orderly
and well. Martha waited very nicely, and I had a person to
help her in the kitchen. Papa kept up too, fully as well as I
expected, though I doubt whether he could have borne another
day of it." Mrs. Gaskell adds, apparently from a communi-
cation received from the bishop, that Dr. Longley was agree-
ably impressed with the gentle unassuming manners of his
hostess, and with the perfect propriety and consistency of the
arrangements in the modest household.6
In 1856, Longley was nominated by Lord Palmerston to the
see of Durham, and two years later to the archbishopric of
York. On October 20, 1862, he was promoted to the see of
Canterbury.
At this period the case of Dr. Colenso, Bishop of Natal,
agitated the English Church. Colenso had published a work in
which he declared that certain portions of the Pentateuch
were of much later date than was commonly supposed, and
that a number of ancient legends had been incorporated with
the history. The bishop of Capetown, claiming to exercise
metropolitan jurisdiction, had excommunicated and deposed
Colenso on account of these opinions.7 Archbishop Longley
was opposed to Colenso's teaching, and approved of his de-
position, but abstained from taking any such part in the
dispute as might bring him into conflict with the government.
In September 1867, the bishops of the Anglican communion
l Ibid. 6 Ibid., p. 163.
1 W. B. Carpenter, A Popular History of the Church of England,
p. 436.
406
Charles Thomas Longley
in all parts of the world were invited to meet at Lambeth under
the presidency of Archbishop Longley. At this first Pan-
Anglican Congress seventy-six bishops assembled. Part of
the business was the consideration of the case of Dr. Colenso,
who was unanimously condemned. An important encyclical
was drawn up in which the canonical scriptures of the Old and
New Testaments were alluded to as the sure word of God,
the firm belief in Christ's divinity was emphasized and the
pretensions to universal rule over God's heritage asserted by
the see of Rome were condemned.
Longley's earnest piety won for him the respect of
all parties in the Church. His Grace was seized with
bronchitis on September 13, 1868, while on his way
back from Tyrol. He reached Addington, but his illness
increased, and he anticipated the end almost from the
first. Three days before his death, when speaking had
become difficult to him, he said: "I commit my soul into
the hands of my God and dear Saviour. I have had proofs
enough of His love in the past, and I am well assured that
whatever sufferings or trials are permitted to befall me are
visitations of love." His last intelligible words were those of
the " Gloria in Excelsis."8 He died on October 27, 1868, and
was buried in Addington parish church. His wife had
predeceased him in 1856. He was survived by three sons
and a daughter. His published works consist chiefly of
sermons and addresses.
8 Guardian, Oct 28. 1868.
407
9i.— ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL TAIT, 1869 to 1882.
Queen of England : Victoria, 1837 to 1901.
Archibald Campbell Tait, the first Scotsman to be pro-
moted to the chair of St. Augustine, was born in Edinburgh
on December 21, 1811. He was the youngest son of Crauford
Tait, of Harviestoun, in Clackmannanshire, and Cumlodden, in
Argyleshire, a gentleman who dissipated a modest fortune on
unsuccessful agricultural pursuits. The mother of Archibald
was Susan, fourth daughter of Sir Hay Campbell, some time
Lord President of the Court of Session, the highest judicial
office in Scotland. She died when her youngest son was barely
three years old, leaving him to the care of his faithful nurse,
Betty Morton, whose judicious training left an influence on
his character throughout life. In 1821, the boy experienced
his first great sorrow in the death of his favourite brother,
Hay Campbell, at the age of twelve.
Archibald was educated at the Edinburgh High School,
whence he proceeded to the recently founded Academy in
the same city. There he distinguished himself in his second
and third year by obtaining, in each case, the gold medal as
" Dux " of the whole school, besides carrying off prizes
innumerable in Latin, Greek, English and French. In October
1827, he matriculated as a student of Glasgow University,
where he spent three years, living in lodgings near the
college, and waited on by Betty Morton, who insisted on
remaining with him throughout his Glasgow career.1 He
devoted himself with great energy to his studies, rising at
4.30 a.m. and seldom working less than ten hours a day. His
correspondence with his father shows that Crauford Tait took
the deepest interest in every detail of his youngest son's
education.
1 Life of Archbishop Tait, by R. T. Davidson and W. Benham,
Vol. I., p. 26.
408
From a photograph by Elliott <i Fry.
ARCHBISHOP TAIT.
Archibald Campbell Tait
In 1830, Archibald was successful in winning a Snell Exhibi-
tion for Balliol College, Oxford. His parents were Presby-
terians, but he had never joined the communion of their
Church, and soon after his arrival at Balliol he was confirmed
by Bishop Bagot, of Oxford. In October 1833, he graduated
B.A., with a first class in the Final Classical Schools, and in the
following year was appointed a fellow and tutor of his college.
His lectures on logic were much appreciated by the students.
After proceeding M.A., he was ordained in 1836, and licensed
to the curacy of Baldon, about five miles from Oxford. This
in addition to his tutorship occupied all his energies. For
five years he carried on the work at Baldon, with unremitting
care, and in all the changes of his after life the recollection of
the lessons learned there never passed away. " To the very
close of his life he used to recount with a certain humorous
pathos the quiet obstruction offered by the farmers to his
Sunday school, the difficulties of a rustic congregation on a
hot summer's day, and the petty quarrels, flirtations and
ambitions of his village choir."2
During these years there were many changes among the
fellows of his college, and before Tait had completed his
twenty-sixth year he found himself the senior and most respon-
sible of the four Balliol tutors. The " Tracts for the Times "
were then in full circulation. In the spring of 1841 the name
of Tait was brought before the world as one of the four tutors
who wrote a public protest against the principles of inter-
pretation of the Thirty-nine Articles laid down by J. H.
Newman in his celebrated Tract XC3 In the same year Tait
organized weekly classes in chapel for the college servants, for
whom he seems to have felt an unusual sense of personal
responsibility.
In July 1842, Tait was chosen to succeed Arnold as
headmaster of Rugby. Though he was by no means a
born schoolmaster, and possessed none of the genius of his
famous predecessor, the school grew and prospered under
his rule. Shortly after settling at Rugby, he became engaged
to Catherine Spooner, daughter of Archdeacon Spooner,
vicar of Elmdon, Warwickshire. They were married in the
summer of 1843, and the union was one of singular happiness.
2 Ibid., p. 60. 3 Times, Dec. 4, 1882.
409
27
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
The laborious schoolwork gradually told on Tait's health.
In 1849 ne had a dangerous attack of rheumatic fever, from the
constitutional effects of which he never entirely recovered.
In the following year the state of his health decided him to
accept an offer from the government of Lord John Russell
of the deanery of Carlisle, a post which it was hoped would
secure for him comparative leisure after his labours at
Rugby.*
Tait entered with great zest into the work of his new
office. It was largely due to his energy that Carlisle
Cathedral was restored at a cost of about £15,000. He was
at this time appointed a member of the Oxford University
Commission, and took a prominent share in drawing up their
report.
The last year of Tait's residence at Carlisle was saddened
by a great bereavement. He was a frequent visitor in
the homes of the poor, and when in the spring of 1856 scarlet
fever in its most virulent form appeared in Carlisle, he is
believed to have carried the infection to the deanery. Of
his six little daughters, whose presence had brought radiance
to his home, five died of this malady within a few weeks of
each other. The sorrow-stricken parents, with their two
remaining children, Crauford, a boy of seven, and an infant
daughter six weeks old, spent the following summer at a house
near Ullswater lent them by some friends. They were pre-
paring to return to the desolate deanery, when Tait received
a letter from the Prime Minister, Viscount Palmerston, offering
him by command of Queen Victoria the see of London.
Many declared that Tait owed his promotion to the episcopal
bench entirely to the queen's deep sympathy with him in his
bereavement. But on no abler prelate could the choice
have fallen. His fervent piety, manly courage and earnest
desire to labour for the poor of London soon com-
manded universal admiration. During the first months of
his episcopate he scandalized many by his undignified and
Methodist-like proceedings. We read of his addressing ship-
loads of emigrants in the docks, Ragged School children in
Golden Lane, omnibus drivers in their great yard at Islington,
costermongers in Co vent Garden Market, railway porters
4 Ibid.
410
Archibald Campbell Tait
from the platform of a locomotive, and a colony of gypsies
upon the common at Shepherd's Bush.5
In 1858, he inaugurated Sunday evening services for the
people in Westminster Abbey, St. Paul's, and the churches
of North and East London. For the extension of such
work, the London Diocesan Home Mission Fund was
established.
The garden parties at Fulham at which the clergy of the
whole diocese were wont to assemble were, thanks to
Mrs. Tait, thoroughly friendly gatherings, where everyone
was made to feel at ease and from which the spirit of humour
was not excluded. At one of these parties an emu, which
had been sent from Australia to the bishop, was turned out
in the meadows to be inspected by the guests, but the cows
resented the intrusion, and gave chase to the unfortunate
bird. " Halloa !" exclaimed Dean Milman excitedly. "Here
goes Colenso and all the bishops after him."6 (Vide Charles
Thomas Longley.)
Tait had little sympathy with the extreme ritualists,
whom he refused to take seriously. "With regard to
ritualism," he once said, " the people of this country have
no love for Popery — nor for anything that approaches
Popery. I do not think there is the slightest danger
of this country ever becoming Roman Catholic, or even
of its adopting a semi-Romanism."7 When forced to take
active measures against ritualists, it was invariably for the
purpose of restoring peace. In 1858, he withdrew the licence
of the Rev. Alfred Poole, curate of St. Paul's, Knights-
bridge, who was accused by several parishioners of misusing
his right to hear confessions.
In the summer of 1859, disgraceful scenes of disorder and
buffoonery began at St. George's in the East, on account of
certain ritualistic ceremonies introduced by the incumbent,
the Rev. Bryan King. These disturbances continued for
nearly a year. The police were introduced into the church,
but were powerless to prevent the noises and interruptions
with which the service was accompanied. King was finally
s Life of Archbishop Tait, I., 255.
6 Times, Dec. 4, 1882.
7 Quarterly Review, 1883, VoL CLV., p. 16.
411
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
persuaded to go abroad for a year, and was afterwards trans-
ferred by Bishop Tait to a country parish in the diocese
of Salisbury. A new incumbent was found for St. George's,
and the parishioners presented to Tait a memorial conveying
to him their thanks for the restoration of peace.
In the House of Lords the sound judgment and strong
common sense of Bishop Tait were soon recognized and his
influence continued to increase almost to the close of his
career. Mention has already been made of the controversy
which commenced in i860 concerning " Essays and Reviews "
(vide John Bird Sumner). Two of the essayists, Dr. Frederick
Temple, headmaster of Rugby (afterwards Archbishop of
Canterbury), and the Rev. Professor Jowett, master of Balliol,
were Tait's intimate friends. After the controversy began,
Temple and Jowett both visited Tait at Fulham and appear
to have gained the impression that to some extent at least
he agreed with their views. When later he joined the other
bishops in censuring the whole book, Jowett and Temple
accused him of treachery, and it was long before confidence
was restored between them. From the first, however, Tait
seems to have drawn a marked distinction between the
different essays, while he joined in the censure of the rash and
harmful character of the volume regarded as a whole.8
In June 1863, Tait inaugurated the Bishop of London's
Fund, which has since become a permanent institution for
the purpose of strengthening and enlarging the diocesan work
in all its branches. Through his efforts £100,000 was raised
in the first year, and £92,000 more promised. He was also
the founder of the Ladies' Diocesan Association, the scheme
of which had been first suggested by Mrs. Tait. He took a
deep interest in Anglican sisterhoods, but strongly dis-
approved of vows being imposed on those who joined them.
In 1865, he supported the bill for a modification of clerical
subscription, proposing to limit the declaration to a simple
promise to conform to the liturgy of the Church of England
as it is now by law established. The bill was, however,
rejected.
In July 1866, the bishop, who had been severely ill in the
spring, was preparing to set out for his holiday, when Asiatic
8 Life of Archbishop Tait, L, 283.
412
Archibald Campbell Tait
cholera in a virulent form appeared in East London. Over-
worked as he was, he decided to remain in town to take
the lead in whatever measures were necessary to inspire
confidence and organize relief. A letter from him in the Times
elicited £3,000 for the sufferers within twenty-four hours.
The whole amount subscribed was about £70,000. Mrs.
Tait accompanied him in his visits to the hospitals and in-
fected districts.9 She afterwards founded a Home at Fulham
for the orphan girls of those who had died of the epidemic.
The bishop left London in the autumn for his well-earned
holiday, but the strain had been too great, and while staying
with his brother at North Berwick he was suddenly seized
with illness. For some weeks his life hung in the balance,
but he gradually recovered strength.
In 1862, Tait had declined the offer of the archbishopric
of York, preferring to remain in London. But when in
October 1868 he received a letter from Mr. Disraeli, asking
permission to nominate him to the see of Canterbury, he at
once gave his consent, since the translation would not involve
his removal from the metropolis. Queen Victoria's personal
affection for Bishop Tait seems to have been again the chief
influence in securing his promotion. Before his installation,
which took place early in 1869, Parliament was dissolved,
and the Liberal party, under the leadership of Mr. Gladstone,
came into power. The first measure to which the new arch-
bishop was called upon to give his consent was the disestab-
lishment of the Irish Church . Recognizing that the principle of
the Bill had been affirmed by the people in a General Election
held on that express issue, he set to work to obtain such amend-
ments as would secure the best possible terms for the disen-
dowed Irish churches and clergy. When the controversy
was over he received warm expressions of thanks from the
queen, Mr. Gladstone and the Irish bishops.
His parliamentary duties were no sooner over for the session
than he entered with great energy on the pastoral work of his
province. But the labour involved again told on his health.
In November 1869, he had a convulsive seizure of a most
alarming kind, and for some time there was partial paralysis
of his face, arm and left side. On his recovery he expressed
9 Ibid., p. 470.
413
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
his readiness to resign, but was dissuaded from doing so by
the queen. Taking advantage of an unrepealed act of
Henry VIII., which provided for the appointment of suffragans
to assist the diocesan bishops in work which was otherwise
beyond their strength, it was decided that an assistant should
be chosen to help him. Archdeacon Parry, who had been
his pupil at Rugby and in later years his domestic chaplain
and intimate friend, was accordingly consecrated bishop of
Dover in Lambeth Palace chapel on March 25, 1870, and at
once took upon his shoulders the main burden of the diocesan
work.10 The winter of 1870-71 was spent by the archbishop
on the Riviera, whence he returned in spring with renewed
strength.
In 1871, painful disputes arose on the subject of the Athana-
sian Creed. Soon after his return to England Tait summoned
a meeting of bishops at Lambeth to consider the best policy
to be adopted with regard to the controversy. He appears
to have approved a suggestion to exclude the Athanasian
Creed from the public services of the Church, and relegate it
to a position similar to that of the Thirty-nine Articles at
the end of the Prayer Book. Another suggestion made by
the bishops was that the creed should retain its place, but that
the damnatory clauses should be omitted. When the matter
was debated in Convocation, Archbishop Tait declared his
belief that there was not a soul in the room who took the
damnatory clauses in their plain and literal sense. This
statement was frequently brought up against him during
the remainder of his life, and his enemies accused him of
having expressed his deliberate contempt for the faith of the
Church Catholic.
In May 1873, an agreement was arrived at by which it
was declared that the creed of St. Athanasius does not make
any addition to the faith as contained in Holy Scripture,
and that the warnings it contains are to be understood no
otherwise than the like warnings in Holy Scripture.
The Public Worship Regulation Act of 1874 was an attempt
to settle disputes concerning ritual by the bishops of each
diocese, who according to the original form of the bill were
to preside over their own diocesan councils. The measure
10 Ibid II., 56.
414
Archibald Campbell Tait
which was largely altered during its passage through Parlia-
ment proved a complete failure. The attempt to put down
ritual by force only succeeded in deposing and imprisoning
a number of well-meaning but unbalanced high church
clergymen. Tait, in advocating the measure, had not foreseen
these results, which he deeply deplored. When the Rev.
A. H. Mackonochie, of St. Alban's, Holborn, was about to be
deprived of his licence under this Act, Tait, then on his death-
bed, took steps which resulted in an exchange of livings, thus
removing him from the jurisdiction of the court. This action
has been interpreted as a complete surrender to the ritualists
of all that for which they had been contending. But it seems
evident that the archbishop merely desired a truce until the
whole question of ecclesiastical procedure should be re-
considered." After his death the Act became practically a
dead letter.
In August 1879, tne Rev. R. W. Enraght, vicar of Holy
Trinity, Bordesley, was condemned by Lord Penzance as Dean
of Arches for certain alleged ritual irregularities ; one of these
being the use of wafer-bread in the Holy Communion. A conse-
crated wafer was abstracted by a communicant, and used as
evidence in court. The archbishop was implored to rescue it
by a number of high churchmen. This he did, strongly
condemned the conduct of the persons who had abstracted
it, and consumed the wafer in his own private chapel. The
gratitude of churchmen for this relief to their feelings was
expressed in no less than 231 memorials presented to the
archbishop. Some of these were expressed in inflated and
overstrained language, which pained and distressed him, and
he was afterwards accused of being unable to comprehend the
feelings with which devout Anglicans regard the consecrated
elements.12
In 1878, the Rev. Crauford Tait, the archbishop's only son,
died at the age of twenty-nine, and six months later he lost
his devoted wife. From the shock caused by these bereave-
ments he never wholly recovered.
In 1880 he warmly supported the Burial Act, by which
nonconformists might be buried in parish churchyards with
" Quarterly Review, 1883, Vol. CLV., p. 33.
" G. W. E. Russell, The Household of Faith, p. 66.
415
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
their own services. The spring of 1882 was spent by him
on the Riviera by order of his physicians. His last public
act was the confirmation of the two sons of the Prince of
Wales.
Archbishop Tait died at Lambeth Palace on Advent Sunday,
December 3, 1882, after an illness of about three months. His
family, mindful of his wishes in this respect, refused the offer
of a public funeral in Westminster Abbey, and he was buried
in Addington churchyard. Of his nine children only three
daughters survived him.
Among the many irrelevant charges brought against the
great archbishop, that of being not only a Scotsman but more
than half a Presbyterian is included. He was also accused
of Erastianism, of vacillation in important crises, and of having
no vocation for holy orders.13
Without attempting here to refute those charges, it is
sufficient to quote the words of one who knew him very in-
timately : " I can say without any element of uncertainty
that the aim and purpose of that life in the years wherein I
knew and shared it were on his part single and straightforward.
He wanted, and he tried to let no changes and chances in
social or political life, no advance in intellectual range, or in
supposed intellectual grip, no honest parting from old moor-
ings, no resetting, if it be honest, of the faith of boyhood,
loosen a man's hold upon the deep down verities of the faith
of the Gospel. He wanted, and he tried to preserve in all the
concerns of faith and life the proportion of great things
and small, the truths that matter much and the truths that
matter comparatively comparatively little. He wanted, and
he tried to bring the affairs of common life, political or social
or industrial, under the dominance of a conscious deliberate
trust in God as His love is revealed and explained to us in
the Life and Words of Jesus Christ. He believed that to be
possible. For himself he knew it to be true."14
Since the Reformation no primate has had so much in-
fluence on Parliament and on the country generally as Arch-
bishop Tait. In theological discussions he was always
moderate and conciliatory, and his unfailing sense of humour
did much to lighten the burden of every-day work. His
M Ibid. '+ Five Archbishops, by Archbishop Davidson, p. 17.
416
Archibald Campbell Tait
charges are full of practical wisdom and deep Christian
experience.
His writings include : " Lessons for School Life " (1850),
" The Dangers and Safeguards of Modern Theology " (1861) ;
" The Present Position of the Church of England," seven
addresses (1872); "The Church of the Future," a charge (1880).
417
92.— EDWARD WHITE BENSON, 1883 to 1896.
Queen of England : Victoria, 1837 to 1901.
On the death of Archbishop Tait, Mr. Gladstone wished to
offer the primacy to the Rev. R. W. Church, Dean of St. Paul's,
but the dean's refusal in advance was so absolute that the
offer was never definitely made. Dr. Harold Browne, Bishop
of Winchester, whose long and distinguished career marked
him out for special honour, would, as his published biography1
shows, have been nominated but for his advanced years and
his enfeebled health. It was then decided to offer the
primacy to Bishop Benson of Truro, who after some
hesitation agreed to accept it.
Edward White Benson was born at 72, Lombard Street,
Birmingham, on July 14, 1829. He was the eldest son of
Edward White Benson, a chemical manufacturer of Bir-
mingham, whose family was descended from a stock of York-
shire dalesmen. The archbishop's grandfather, Captain White
Benson, of the Sixth Warwickshire Regiment, had squandered
a handsome fortune by reckless extravagance. His mother
was Harriet Baker, a sister of Sir Thomas Baker, of Man-
chester. She was left a widow in 1843, her husband's death
having been hastened by his failure in business. The chemical
works were closed, but her husband's partners gave her the
house for life, and an annuity, on which she attempted to
educate her six children.
At the age of eleven, Edward entered the Grammar School
of King Edward VI. at Birmingham, where Dr. Prince Lee,
afterwards bishop of Manchester, was headmaster. Lee
inspired his pupils with the deepest reverence and affection,
and Benson frequently declared that he owed all that was
best in himself to the influence of that beloved master. Among
Benson's fellow pupils were Brooke Foss Westcott and Joseph
Barber Lightfoot, both of whom afterwards held successively
1 p. 456. Cf. Times, Dec. 21, 1882.
418
From a photograph by Ruttell & Son a.
ARCHBISHOP BENSON.
Edward White Benson
the bishopric of Durham. With Lightfoot, Benson formed a
close friendship which continued through life.
At an early age Benson conceived a desire to take holy
orders. In a small room which had been an office in his
father's deserted factory he established an oratory. Here
was a table rudely draped and stools for kneeling. Round
the walls were hung rubbings of brasses taken by himself from
the churches he had visited. On the table stood a plain wooden
cross made by an old carpenter, and paid for out of the boy's
scanty pocket money. His brothers and sisters were strictly
forbidden to enter this sacred place, but as an additional
precaution, and in case they disobeyed him, he arranged an
ingenious trap which automatically both recorded and
avenged the entrance of any intruding worshipper.2
In 1848, Benson was admitted to Trinity College, Cambridge,
as a subsizar. Two years later his mother died suddenly
a few hours after the death from typhus fever of her eldest
daughter Harriet, whom she had nursed devotedly. As her
annuity died with her, the children were left almost penniless.
Through the kindness of friends, however, they were all
provided for, and were enabled to continue their education.
Benson was himself assisted by Mr. Francis Martin, the bursar,
afterwards vice-master of Trinity College, a childless man of
an intensely affectionate nature, who treated him for years as
a favourite son.3
Benson graduated B.A. in 1852 as eighth in the classical
tripos, and senior chancellor's medallist. In the following
year he was ordained by his old master, Bishop Prince Lee,
and was elected a fellow of his college. He soon afterwards
accepted an assistant mastership at Rugby. There he resided
in the house of his cousin, Mrs. Sidgwick, widow of the Rev.
William Sidgwick, of Skipton, Yorkshire, whose daughter
Mary he married in 1859. In tne same year he was elected
first headmaster of Wellington College, Berkshire, which had
been founded as a memorial of the great duke. Benson had
been recommended to the Prince Consort for this post by
Dr. Temple, headmaster of Rugby.
When Benson took possession at Wellington College, the
2 Life of Edward White Benson, by Arthur Christopher Benson, I., 24.
3 Ibid., p. 94.
419
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
buildings were in an unfinished state, and chaos prevailed.
Here for the first time he had an opportunity of proving his
great genius as an organizer. Instead of making the institu-
tion a charity school for the sons of officers as had been the
original intention, Benson converted it into one of the great
public schools of England. A beautiful chapel was built and
the service arranged by him with extreme care. His name
attracted what proved to be an exceptionally high class of
assistant masters. On his recommendation, the governors
provided the college with all the latest improvements, and
appliances for physical training. He was a strict disciplinarian
with the boys and with his colleagues, but this was a fault on
the right side.
Benson remained at Wellington College till 1872, when on
the invitation of Bishop Wordsworth, whose examining
chaplain he had been for some years, he became a canon
residentiary of Lincoln and chancellor of the cathedral.
His work at Lincoln was extraordinarily successful. He had
long felt that the clergy of the Established Church had need
of a more thorough and systematic professional training for
their duties. He accordingly established at Lincoln a theo-
logical training college called the Schola Cancellarii, the chan-
cellor being the officer of a cathedral who was nominally con-
nected with education.4 He also established large night
schools for working men in connection with the city missions,
Bible classes and lectures for mechanics. At Lincoln he
was in the front of every movement, social as well as
ecclesiastical, and his popularity was such that to the end
of his life his presence in that city was enough to draw
crowds of working people.
In 1877, Benson was consecrated to the newly-erected see of
Truro, in Cornwall. As no house was provided for the bishop,
he took up his residence in the vicarage of Kenwyn, little
more than a mile from Truro. He enlarged the house, built
new stables, and called it " Lis Escop," the Cornish for
Bishop's Court. His first task was to acquaint himself with
every parish and every incumbent in his diocese. " He went
off for long driving tours, staying at remote vicarages and old
unknown country houses in still, wooded valleys, strangely
< Times, Oct 12, 1896.
420
Edward White Benson
out-of-the-world places such as one can hardly imagine to
exist in busy England. Many were the curious stories he
brought back of sayings and doings of Christian people in
these secluded regions. At one place the vicar's sister had
been used to read the lessons in church in a deep bass voice.
In another, several years before, the curate-in-charge had been
chained to the altar rails while he read the service, as he had
a harmless mania which made him suddenly flee from the
church if his own activities were for an instant suspended,
as for example by a response. The churchwarden, a
farmer, kept the padlock key in his pocket till the service
was safely over."5
Benson soon identified himself with every Cornish interest,
and gained the sympathy not only of churchmen but
of the great Wesleyan body in Cornwall. He was never
tired of expressing his gratitude for the hearty manner
in which he was received by all classes and all sects of Cornish-
men. He laboured with great energy to organize the new
diocese, and appointed twenty-four honorary canons, to each
of whom special duties were assigned. An excellent divinity
school similar to that at Lincoln was founded by him at
Truro ; the old Grammar School was revived and a High School
for girls instituted, to which he sent his own daughters. A most
perceptible change was brought about by him in the church
life of Cornwall. Scores of churches were restored, many new
ones built, and chapels provided in remote districts. But
the greater task to which he addressed himself was the building
of Truro cathedral, for the founding of which he was mainly
responsible. The foundation stone was laid on May 20,
1880, by the Prince of Wales as Duke of Cornwall. Seven
years later Benson (then archbishop) was present at the
consecration of the cathedral.
In the second year of Benson's episcopate at Truro he
experienced a great bereavement by the death of his eldest
son, Martin White Benson, who died of meningitis at Win-
chester College at the age of seventeen. He was a boy
endowed with singular gifts of thought and expression.
At the time of his nomination to the primacy Benson was
fifty-three, and in the full vigour of manhood. His trans-
s Life, I., 429.
421
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
lation to Canterbury took place in January 1883. The
appointment was unpopular with the Liberal party, for he was
known to be a Tory, and was suspected of being a very high
churchman.
An important event of his primacy was the trial of Dr.
Edward King, Bishop of Lincoln, on a charge of having broken
the ecclesiastical law by certain offences in regard to ritual.
When called on by the Church Association in 1888 to act as
judge in the case, Benson refused to do so until the jurisdiction
of the archiepiscopal court had been fully acknowledged.
After prolonged arguments the authority of this court was
affirmed by the Privy Council.
The suit came on for trial in February 1890, and judgment
was delivered at Lambeth Palace on November 21, the arch-
bishop sitting with five bishops as assessors. In the interval
between the trial and the passing of the judgment Benson had
studied the case in all its bearings, and his judgment was a
masterpiece for scholarship and legal lucidity. The judg-
ment was substantially in Bishop King's favour, though each
party was required to pay its own costs. The effect of the
judgment was to legalize certain practices which had hither-
to been regarded as unlawful. The archbishop decided :
(1) That the mixture of water with wine in the communion
cup must not be performed as an actual part of divine service.
(2) That the eastward position is lawful if so managed as not
to make the manual acts invisible. (3) That the A gnus Dei may
be sung. (4) That lighted candles on the altar, if not lighted
during the service, are permissible. (5) That the sign of the
cross at the absolution and at the blessing was an innovation
and must be discontinued. The archbishop's judgment
was afterwards scrupulously obeyed by Bishop King, even
when celebrating in his private chapel.6
At the time when the judgment was pronounced the
archbishop was again under the shadow of a great sorrow,
for his eldest daughter had died of diphtheria a few weeks
previously.
It may be said that from 1886 until his death Benson never
ceased to be at work on Church bills. A Bill for the Reform
of Church Patronage, the Clergy Discipline Bill, the Free
6 Quarterly Review, Oct. 1897.
422
Edward White Benson
Education Bill of 1891, and the Tithe Act were among the
more important of those for which he laboured. As a speaker
he was less effective in the House of Lords than on the plat-
form or in the pulpit, but his natural dignity and grace of
manner helped him and he was always heard with respect.
Under favourable circumstances he was a charming speaker,
as, for instance, when addressing a crowd of working men, or
at the meetings of the Diocesan Conference held every summer
at Lambeth.7 Throughout his primacy he took a prominent
part in opposing bills for the disestablishment of the Welsh
Church, and it was largely due to his efforts that these bills
were defeated. At the Rhyl conference in October 1891, he
gave a memorable address on the subject, closing with these
words : "I come from the steps of the chair of St. Augustine,
your younger ally, to tell you that by the benediction of God
we will not quietly see you disinherited."
On May 16, 1895, the archbishop presided at an enormous
meeting in the Albert Hall, London, at which the Central
Committee for Church Defence and Instruction was founded.
He took a deep interest in Anglican sisterhoods, and in the
higher education of women, and instituted weekly Bible classes
for fashionable ladies at Lambeth Palace.
Benson laboured to promote missionary work, and
was specially interested in a mission, of which he was
practically the founder, to the Assyrian Christians. The
Assyrian or East Syrian Christians represent the Church
of the old Persian Empire, whose bishops were originally
dependent on Antioch. They are subject both to Turkey
and Persia. Though they are generally believed to be
Nestorians, it is a moot point whether they hold the heresy
usually attributed to that sect. Archbishops Howley and
Tait had at different times sent missions to the Assyrian
Christians to encourage them in preserving their existence as
a national Church. Archbishop Benson, to whom they had
applied for aid, despatched Mr. Athelstan Riley to Assyria
on a mission of investigation in the autumn of 1884. Riley's
experience confirmed all that had been said, namely that in
the midst of poverty and ignorance, with temptations to
apostasy and inducements to become proselytes to other
7 Ibid.
423
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Churches, the Assyrian Christians showed a desperate faithful-
ness to the ancient Church of their nation. In 1885 the arch-
bishop determined to refound the mission on a permanent
basis, and sent out two priests with the object not of bringing
over the Assyrian Christians to the Church of England or of
altering their ancient traditions, but to encourage them in
bettering their religious conditions, and to strengthen their
ancient Church, which without some assistance must
eventually succumb, though unwillingly, to the external
organizations at work in its midst.8 Under Benson's
successors the mission to the Assyrian Christians has con-
siderably developed.
On April 20, 1895, The Times published a letter from Pope
Leo XIII., in which he made an eloquent appeal to the English
people to join in bringing about the union of Christendom.
The tone of this letter raised hopes that the pope might be
induced to recognise the validity of Anglican orders. In
these hopes Archbishop Benson does not appear to have
joined, and the sequel proved that his judgment had been
correct. He was assured by certain Roman clergy that the
pope was only waiting some expression of goodwill from
himself before taking further steps in the matter. Benson
declined, however, to enter into a correspondence with
Rome. In September 1896, the pope issued a bull in
which he proclaimed the absolute invalidity of Anglican
orders.
Archbishop Benson visited Canterbury more frequently
than any of his immediate predecessors. He possessed a
master key which opened all the doors and gates of the
cathedral, and sometimes when residing at Canterbury would
steal away and shut himself up alone for a while in the place
known as Becket's Crown, where is the marble chair of
Augustine. It was in this contact with the church's sacred
places, and through them with his predecessors and their
government, that he examined his own work and formed plans
for the future.9
In September 1896, the archbishop started with Mrs. Benson
for a short tour in Ireland. He preached at the re-opening of
8 Benson's Life, Vol. II., p. 176.
' Quarterly Review, Oct. 1897, p. 320.
424
Edward White Benson
Kildare Cathedral and elsewhere, receiving everywhere an
enthusiastic welcome. On Saturday, October 10, he and Mrs.
Benson returned to England and proceeded to Hawarden
to spend the week-end with Mr. W. E. Gladstone, for whom
he had a warm admiration. They reached Hawarden about
6 p.m. on the Saturday evening, the archbishop appearing to
be in the best of health and spirits, full of his Irish tour, of
which he spoke with great delight. On the Sunday morning
he and Mrs. Benson ,were present at the eight o'clock
celebration of the Holy Communion. After breakfast at
Hawarden he walked to church with Mr. Henry Gladstone.
The service had begun, and the absolution was being pro-
nounced, when he suddenly fell forward unconscious. He was
carried to the adjoining rectory, and died in a few minutes.
When the sad news was broken to Mr. Gladstone, he was
deeply affected and exclaimed : " He died as a soldier. It was
a noble end to a noble life."
The funeral took place at Canterbury, Benson being the
first archbishop since Pole to be buried in the cathedral.
He was survived by his wife, his daughter Margaret, and
three distinguished sons, namely, Arthur Christopher Benson,
afterwards fellow and lecturer of Magdalene College, Cam-
bridge, Edward Frederick Benson the novelist, and Robert
Hugh Benson, now the Very Rev. Monsignor Benson, priest
of the Catholic arch-diocese of Westminster, also well known
as a novelist.
" Archbishop Benson was not only a good man," says one
writer, " but a man of rare gifts, extraordinary charm of
character and endowed with the strange power of making
lives more vivid." His deepest desire for the Church of
England was the renewal of her inner vitality.10 In manner
he was courtly and dignified, and was thus eminently well
fitted to play his part in great state ceremonials. His chief
works are : (i) " Boy-Life " (sermons at Wellington College)
1874; (2) " Singleheart" (sermons at Lincoln), 1877;
(3) " The Cathedral, its necessary place in the Life of the
Church," 1878; (4) The "Seven Gifts" (addresses at his
primary visitation of Canterbury diocese)), 1885 ; (5) " Christ
and His Times" (at second visitation), 1889 ; (6) " Fishers of
10 Ibid.
425
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Men " (at third visitation), 1893 ; (7) " Living Theology and
other Sermons," 1891. The following works were post-
humously published : (1) " Cyprian, his Life, his Times,
his Work," 1892 ; (2) " Prayers Public and Private," 1899 ;
(3) " The Apocalypse " 1900."
Diet, of Nat. Biog.
426
r
.'*
From a pftotOflraM by Kus»eii it Sons.
ARCHBISHOP TEMPLE.
93-— FREDERICK TEMPLE, 1896 to 1902.
Sovereigns of England : Victoria, 1837 to 1901.
Edward VII., 1901 to 1910.
On the sudden death of Archbishop Benson in 1896, it was
understood that the choice of a successor would probably
be made from among three distinguished prelates : Dr.
Creighton, Bishop of Peterborough, Dr. Randall Davidson,
Bishop of Winchester, and Dr. Temple, Bishop of London.
Dr. Creighton and Dr. Davidson were comparatively young
men, while Dr. Temple was in his seventy-fifth year, and the
primacy seemed a fitting reward for his long and faithful
service.1 On him, therefore, the choice fell. On October 22,
1896, Lord Salisbury wrote to Dr. Temple stating that he was
authorized by her Majesty to nominate him to the primacy,
and on the following day the bishop wrote his acceptance.
Frederick Temple was the third son of Major Octavius
Temple, sometime sub-inspector of militia, and was born on
November 30, 1821, in Santa Maura, one of the Ionian Islands,
where his father was then stationed. His grandfather was the
Rev. W. J . Temple, vicar of St. Gluvias, near Penryn, Cornwall.
In 1805, Major Temple married Dorcas, daughter of Richard
Carveth, of Probus, near Truro, who traced his descent through
the Le Despensers to Guy de Beauchamp, second Earl of
Warwick. Frederick Temple was the thirteenth of fifteen
children, of whom eight grew up.2
In 1830, when Frederick was nine years old, the family
came to England, and Major Temple bought a farm at Axon,
near Culmstock, in Devon; on which he taught his sons to
work. After some time, it was found that the farm would
not pay, and Major Temple applied to Government for
employment. He was offered the governorship of Sierra
Leone, which he accepted. In spite of his wife's reluctance,
' Times, Dec. 24, 1902.
2 Memoirs of Archbishop Temple, by Seven Friends, I., 3-16.
427
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
he let the farm, but not the house, in which she remained, and
set off to Sierra Leone, where he died eight months later.3
The Government granted his widow a pension of £100 a year
for life, but she could not afford to send the boys to a boarding
school, and for some years educated them herself. She was
a woman of excellent judgment; and her youngest son Frederick
never forgot the debt he owed her for his early training.
At the age of twelve, Frederick Temple was sent to
Blundell's School, Tiverton, where he remained for five years,
living in lodgings very economically. Of this school he
always spoke with affection and gratitude. His progress
was remarkable, and in 1838 he won a Blundell scholarship
for Balliol College, Oxford, thus becoming independent.
He never asked his mother for a penny again. A gift of £50
from an anonymous friend was of great assistance in enabling
him to proceed to Oxford. These were the days of the
" Tracts for the Times," and Temple was much interested
in the theological discussions which arose out of them. He
was a most diligent student, and in May 1842, graduated
B.A., with a double-first in classics and mathematics. In
the autumn of the same year he was elected a fellow of his
college, and became lecturer in mathematics and logic.
In his undergraduate days, Temple was an ardent Tory.
It was only gradually that his interests in the amelioration
of the working-classes, and his belief that they could better
their own condition, led him to join the Liberals. In 1845
he was made junior dean, and in the following year was
ordained by Bishop Wilberforce, of Lincoln. Three years
later he resigned his fellowship, and for the next ten years was
attached to the department of the Committee of Council on
Education : first as examiner in the office, then as principal
of Kneller Hall, between Twickenham and Whitton, an
institution for the training of masters for Poor Law Schools ;
and lastly from 1855-57 as one 0I Her Majesty's inspectors of
Training Schools. In 1857 he took the degrees of B.D. and
D.D., and in November of that year was chosen to succed
Dr. Goulburn in the headmastership of Rugby School.
Temple brought with him to Rugby his aged mother, to
whose earlier struggles the success of her son had put an end.
1 Ibid., p. 24.
428
Frederick Temple
The bond between mother and son was a very close one.
A photograph of this period shows him standing by her side,
and the look of tender affection on his face gives some idea
of the real heart of the man.4 With his mother came also
Janetta Octavia Temple, the youngest of his sisters, his
senior by two years, who managed the household. The
Rugby boys soon found that they had to do with a strong and
humorous man, as fair and simple in method as he was
penetrating in judgment.5 As a teacher he exercised great
power. While making the school strong on the classical
side he also instituted scholarships for science and built
a laboratory. The mainspring of his influence lay in
the chapel sermons. The men and boys who Sunday
after Sunday listened with earnest attention to his short
address, perhaps lasting only a quarter of an hour, felt
that compressed into it was the force by which they were
to live till the next Sunday came round. To a volume of
sermons preached in Rugby School Chapel between 1858
and i860 he added the touching introductory note '•
" To the boys of Rugby School and to their parents, this
volume is affectionately inscribed by one who would gladly
sacrifice every other aim if by doing so he could help any of
his pupils to live in the spirit of the Bible and to love the Lord
Jesus Christ." It was marvellous how he found time to do
other things besides his school work. The mother who was
too poor to hire a nurse to lift her sick son told how he came
day after day as soon as he discovered her need to the Bilton
Road, after his third lesson with the sixth, to do it for her.6
He also identified himself with the interests of the artisan
class living in the neighbourhood of Rugby.
In i860, Dr. Temple's name came prominently before the
public in connection with the volume called " Essays and
Reviews " (vide Archbishop Tait) . It was the joint production
of seven authors, the first essay being " On the Education of
the World," by Frederick Temple, D.D., Headmaster,
Rugby School, Chaplain in ordinary to the Queen. In the
Quarterly Review of January 1861, Bishop Wilberforce of
Oxford condemned the book in a vigorous denunciatory article.
• C.f. Times, Dec. 24th, 1902.
s Frederick Temple, by E. G. Sandfoid, Introd., p. xxiii.
6 Memoirs, I., 162, 216.
429
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
This attracted attention to the essays, and for some time
the storm of anger and clamour raged against them with
portentous force. A document condemning the whole book
was drawn up by Archbishop Longley (q. v.) and was signed
by him and twenty-five of his suffragans, including Bishop
Tait of London. As already related, Tait's action in the
matter led to a breach in his friendship with Temple, and
for some time an epistolary warfare was waged between
them. Temple concluded his correspondence with Tait on
the subject with these words : " You will keep your friends
if you compel them to feel that in every crisis of life they
must be on their guard against trusting you."
In July 1869, Temple declined Mr. Gladstone's offer of the
deanery of Durham, but in the following October he accepted
the bishopric of Exeter. His appointment caused consider-
able dissatisfaction in certain quarters, and the controversy
concerning " Essays and Reviews " was revived. He was
urged by his friends to withdraw from publication the essay
which he had contributed to the volume, but he refused to
do so while the storm raged. Benson, then headmaster of
Wellington, whose friendship for Temple remained unbroken
throughout life wrote : " Those who censure the conge d? elite
know not the man ; they know not the singleness of purpose,
truth and patience ; they know not the courage and manliness
of the life which they would divert from the service of the
Church ; they know not, what is more, the power of inspiration,
not short of genius, which he has for others." Pusey, on the
other hand, declared that " the choice was the most frightful
enormity ever perpetrated by a prime minister."
For some time it was doubtful whether the dean and chapter
of Exeter would act on the conge tV elite. Ultimately of the
twenty-three members entitled to vote, thirteen were found
to be in favour of Temple, six against him, and four absented
themselves. Though protests were made at the confirmation
of his election in Bow Church, and also at his consecration
in Westminster Abbey, the ceremony was allowed to proceed.
Dean Stanley afterwards related that in anticipation of a
disturbance he had posted close to the sacrarium two
stalwart constables disguised as vergers.7
7 Times, Dec. 24, 1902.
430
Frederick Temple
Temple had declined to make concessions while a bishopric
was hanging over his head, but after his consecration he with-
drew his essay from future editions of " Essays and Reviews."
During his episcopate at Exeter, the suspicion and repugnance
with which he was at first received were gradually changed into
affection and absolute trust. Shortly after his installation
a meeting of the Church Missionary Society was held at Exeter,
but the bishop was not invited to be present. The prelimin-
ary tea was proceeding when the assembly was dismayed to
see him marching up the room with his characteristic slouch.
The worthy lady collectors whispered their horror to each
other ; one or two of the irreconcilable men muttered " Don't
rise, don't rise," as the rest stood up to receive him, but in
a few minutes the bishop was addressing the meeting from
the chair, as the chairman had not arrived. He had not been
invited, he said, but he had come because the cause was as
dear to his heart as to theirs, and in spite of narrow means he
had contributed to it since he was ten years old.8
Temple's childhood had been spent in Devonshire, and he
had for its people a genuine sympathy and affection. During
the twelve years he held the see of Exeter his marvellous
physical strength enabled him to accomplish tasks before
which many younger men would have quailed. He would
frequently journey across bleak Dartmoor, with its rough
roads, to conduct services for the convicts at Dartmoor
Prison, some of whom he confirmed. As in London later,
he organized the chapters of the rural deaneries and inspired
the whole diocese with a sense of cohesion. It was largely
due to his endeavours that the sub-division of the diocese
was carried out, and the see of Truro erected (vide Archbishop
Benson). In the Lent term of 1884, he was invited to give
the Bampton Lectures at Oxford, and chose for his subject
" The Relation between Religion and Science." Matthew
Arnold and Robert Browning were among his hearers.
Temple's mother had died at Rugby in May 1866. Until
1873 the Palace at Exeter was presided over by his sister,
but her health began to fail, and she was reluctantly obliged
to leave her brother's home to reside wherever the conditions
of climate were found most favourable.9 On August 24, 1876,
8 Ibid. 9 Memoirs, I., 518.
431
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
at the age of fifty-five, Temple was married to Beatrice Blanche
Lascelles, fifth daughter of William Saunders Sebright
Lascelles, and Lady Caroline Georgiana Howard, daughter
of George, sixth Earl of Carlisle. Many happy years followed
this union. In the companionship of his sons the bishop
renewed his youth, and would often share their games like
a happy schoolboy.
Dr. Temple was a strong advocate of educational reform
and of temperance. These subjects he made especially his
own. On the passing of the Free Education Act of 1870 he
succeeded in raising a large sum by means of voluntary con-
tributions for the purpose of making the necessary improve-
ments in the Church schools throughout his diocese. The
question of secondary education also claimed a large share of
his attention. His idea was to give opportunities for the
poorest children to rise by means of scholarships, if their
abilities permitted, from the elementary schools to the
secondary, and thence to the universities. He was a member
of the Royal Commission for Education and was mainly in-
strumental in starting the scheme which afterwards developed
into the Oxford and Cambridge Local Examinations.
" If ever mortal man lived to overcome obstacles, Dr.
Temple was the man," says one writer ; " to attempt to thwart
him in any way involved the risk of rousing within him greater
determination to achieve the end in view." On one occasion,
while Bishop of Exeter, he paid a visit to a certain country
rectory. Absorbed in conversation, he had forgotten the
flight of time, and to enable him to reach the station by the
shortest route the curate was despatched as guide. Things
were getting desperate when to the curate's mind a brook
formed an insurmountable obstacle. He was anxiously
searching for a narrow part convenient to their leaping
capacity when, to his consternation, he beheld the bishop
fording the stream with the water well-nigh up to his waist.
He did it to good purpose too, for he just caught the train,
which enabled him to fulfil his engagement at a meeting at
Exeter the same evening.10
Before setting out on his last expedition to Egypt in 1884,
General Gordon called on Bishop Temple and told him that
10 Archbishop Temple, by Charles H. Dant, p. 104.
432
Frederick Temple
it was his earnest wish to make the gospel known to the
people who had come under his care. He therefore desired
to have the bishop's authority to baptize any of those who
should be willing to confess the faith of Christ. That
authorization was gladly granted."
As a follower of Mr. Gladstone, Dr. Temple took an active
part in speaking and writing in favour of the Education Act,
of Mr. Forster, and the disestablishment of the Irish Church.
His interest in temperance work caused him to be frequently
called upon to address meetings on the subject in all parts of
the country. On one occasion, at a temperance meeting held
at Dover he described with a pathos which made many of
his auditors catch their breadth, that he had resolved to
become a total abstainer on hearing a piteous appeal in his
own library at Exeter from a man who described himself
as " that most degraded of all creatures a drunken clergy-
man."
On February 25, 1885, Dr. Temple was nominated to succeed
Dr. Jackson in the see of London. When he left Exeter,
a memorial of regret at his departure was presented to him,
signed by many of the clergy who had before protested
against his appointment.12
The story of his London episcopate is one of incessant
labours. Lord Salisbury, himself a hard worker, once declared
that he was ashamed to talk of hard work in the presence of
the bishop of London. In addition to his visitation charges
he instituted the custom of addressing in turn the ruridecanal
chapters. With the poor of London he was very popular.
It was due to his generosity that an important enlargement
was made to Bishop's Park, Fulham, and recreation ground of
about twelve acres provided for the use of the public for ever.
Later, when he became archbishop, he made over for a public
recreation ground a field adjoining Lambeth Palace. At the
time of the dockers' strike in the autumn of 1889, he returned
suddenly to London from his holiday in North Wales in order to
mediate in the dispute. During the Chartist riots Dr. Temple
was sworn a special constable for service in London.
In October 1896, Temple was nominated by Lord Salisbury
to the archbishopric of Canterbury. He was then seventy-five
11 Ibid., p. 128. ,2 Memoirs, I., p. 597.
433
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
yeaxs of age, and his sight was failing, but he declared that he
was good for at least six years' work. Strange to say, the
date of his translation was December 22, 1896, and his cal-
culation proved correct almost to a day. One of his first acts
as primate was to sell the estate at Addington Park, near
Croydon, which had been purchased by Archbishop Manners-
Sutton. With part of the proceeds of the sale he bought a
house in the precincts of Canterbury Cathedral, and converted
it into an archiepiscopal residence.
During his short primacy it was his lot to be called upon
to officiate at a Jubilee celebration, a royal funeral, and a
coronation. On the occasion of the Diamond Jubilee in
1897, he was present on the steps of St. Paul's Cathedral when
the Queen's carriage drew up, and after pronouncing the
benediction called for three cheers for her Majesty.
He officiated at Queen Victoria's funeral in 1901 in St.
George's Chapel, Windsor, and on August 7, 1902, crowned
King Edward VII. in Westminster Abbey. It was feared
that the archbishop's failing sight would incapacitate him
for conducting the coronation service. But his indomitable
courage carried him through the long and tedious ceremony.
After the ceremony, when the aged primate knelt to do
homage to the crowned sovereign, the weakness of his legs
made it difficult for him to rise again. The king himself,
observing his difficulty, immediately put out his hand and
assisted him to rise. " God bless you, sir, God be with you,"
said the archbishop.
On the Monday following the coronation (August 11), the
king summoned the archbishop to an audience in Buckingham
Palace, and conferred on him the Collar of the Victorian
Order, which he desired him to wear on all suitable occasions.
Twice during his primacy Archbishop Temple visited
Scotland. In May 1898, at the request of Dr. James Paton,
of St. Paul's, Glasgow, the Convener of the Committee on
Temperance, he went to Edinburgh, and addressed the General
Assembly on that subject which had for so long been near
his heart. Four years later, when he was within a few months
of eighty years of age, he went to Perth, and took part
in the dedication of the new Chapter House added to St.
Ninian's Cathedral, in memory of Charles Wordsworth, for
434
Frederick Temple
forty years bishop of the united dioceses of St. Andrews,
Dunkeld and Dumblane.13
The fourth Lambeth Conference, which was attended by
nearly two hundred bishops, met in the summer of 1897 under
Temple's presidency. That year was the 1,300th anniversary of
the landing of St. Augustine in England. On July 2, the arch-
bishop and the members of the Conference proceeded by
special train to Ebbs Fleet, to hold a solemn service at the
traditional place of landing of St. Augustine and his band
of forty monks in the year 597. Archbishop Temple proved
an ideal president at the Lambeth gathering. His gracious
hospitality was greatly appreciated by all those present.
The reply to the papal bull in which Leo XIII. had
denied the validity of Anglican orders had been prepared
by Archbishop Benson (q. v.) before his death and was
issued in the names of Dr. Temple and Dr. Maclagan of
York. In this document the archbishops solemnly re-
pudiated the claims made by the Roman see. Archbishop
Temple made two visitations of his province during his
primacy, one in 1897 and the other in 1902. His charges to
the clergy delivered on these occasions were afterwards
printed. In 1900 he presided over the World's Temperance
Congress in London.
On December 2, 1902, when delivering a speech on the
Education Bill in the House of Lords, he was seized with sudden
illness, and was taken back to Lambeth in a very feeble state.
On December 11, he expressed a desire to receive the Holy
Communion. It was administered to him by the arch-
bishop of York, in the presence of the bishop of London (Dr.
Winnington Ingram) the bishop of Winchester (Dr. Davidson)
and the Rev. W. J. Conybeare, the archbishop's domestic
chaplain. " After the administration the archbishop raised
himself' in his chair and expressed his thanks to those who
had joined with him ' at that great feast,' and his especial
gratitude to his household for their service and their kindness
in the past. Then he turned to the archbishop of York,
and gave him his blessing, and next blessed the bishop of
London. He motioned to the bishop of Winchester to come
to him for the same purpose. But it was clear that the effort
1 Memoirs, p. II., 281.
435
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
was becoming too great, and, as his last strength was due to
his wife and sons, the rest then left the room."1* He died on
the morning of December 23, and was buried in the Cloister
Garth of Canterbury Cathedral. He was survived by his
widow and two sons, Frederick Charles, born in 1879,
appointed in 1908 district engineer under the Indian Govern-
ment ; William, born 1881, fellow and tutor of Queen's
College, Oxford, 1908-10, headmaster of Repton School,
1910.
Archbishop Temple's most obvious characteristic was a
certain rugged simplicity, which was often mistaken for
brusqueness and want of feeling. He did not hesitate to speak
his mind to those with whom he disagreed. But those who
knew him intimately were well aware that beneath a some-
what forbidding exterior he hid a wealth of affection and
tenderness. Benson described him as " the most tender-
hearted, patient and enduring of men." His mind was
strong and sensible rather than brilliant. " In early life,"
says another writer, "his views of the causes that were
agitating men's minds were in advance of current notions.
But as his long life passed onward he remained much what he
had been in his prime. He added little to his stock of ideas,
and on any question of moment it was usually possible to fore-
cast what he would say. But to the last his immense power
of work never forsook him."15 His chief works are " The
Relation between Religion and Science " (Bampton Lectures,
1884) ; " On the Reservation of the Sacrament " (1900) ;
and several volumes of sermons and episcopal charges.
K Ibid., II., p. 384. '5 Times, Dec. 24, 1902.
436
94-— RANDALL THOMAS DAVIDSON, 1903 to .
Kings of England : Edward VII., 1901 to 1910.
George V., 1910 to .
Randall Thomas Davidson was born in Edinburgh on
April 7, 1848, and is the eldest son of the late Mr. Henry
Davidson, of Muir House, Edinburgh. His mother was
Henrietta, third daughter of Mr. John Swinton, formerly an
officer in the army, who in 1850 took the additional name
of Campbell on succeeding his maternal aunt, Miss Mary
Campbell, in the estates of Kimmerghane, Berwickshire.
He was educated at Harrow, where he was the pupil
and subsequently the life-long friend of Westcott, afterwards
bishop of Durham. During his last year at Harrow he was
accidentally injured by a gunshot wound, which for some years
and during the whole of his university career made him an
invalid. From Harrow he proceeded to Trinity College, Oxford,
but had to spend two winters in Italy, and finally broke
down in the middle of his examination for his B.A. degree
in the Honours School of Law and Modern History. He had
to retire from the examination, but the examiners gave him
a third class on the few papers he had done.1 He afterwards
read for holy orders with Dr. Vaughan, Dean of Llandaff , and
Master of the Temple, with whom he maintained a friendship
until the death of the latter.
His intimacy with the Tait family dated from his school
days, for Randall Davidson's father and Archibald Campbell
Tait had been schoolfellows fifty years before, and had ever
since remained friends. He was frequently a guest at Lambeth
and Addington,2 and Crauford Tait, the archbishop's son,
who was one year his junior, was among his most intimate
friends at Oxford. The two joined a party in 1872 for a
tent-journey in the East, visiting Egypt, the Arabian Desert
1 Guardian January 14, 1903 ; cf. Oxford Honours Lists, 1870.
1 Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. II., p. 552.
437
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
and Palestine. On March i, 1874, they were ordained
deacons together in St. Mark's, Kennington, by Dr. Parry,
Bishop of Dover, Archbishop Tait being prevented by illness
from officiating.
Mr. Davidson was appointed to the curacy of Dartford,
Kent, where he remained for three years and gained
much valuable experience in parochial work. His first vicar
at Dartford was Canon Bowlby (afterwards bishop of
Coventry), who placed him in charge of a district containing
large paper mills. During his curacy an epidemic of small-
pox devastated the district, and the splendid work done
by the clergy in nursing and attending the stricken attracted
considerable notice. Mr. Davidson started Bible classes for
the workpeople, which were well attended and proved very
successful. The experience which he thus gained proved
of the greatest value in his subsequent career. When dean
of Windsor he conducted a Bible class for ladies, which
had over a hundred members.3 In 1875 Mr. Davidson was
ordained priest by Archbishop Tait, and in that year took
the degree of M.A. In 1877, he succeeded Crauford Tait
as the archbishop's secretary and domestic chaplain, and
took up his residence at Lambeth. In the following year
he married Miss Edith Murdoch Tait, the archbishop's second
surviving daughter. The marriage took place in Lambeth
chapel on November 12, 1878, the primate officiating. A
few weeks later Mr. Davidson and his newly wedded wife
were suddenly recalled from Florence by the death of Mrs.
Tait {vide Archbishop Tait).
Of the period of his chaplaincy Dr. Davidson writes :
" I can never forget the courteous consideration and kind-
ness with which the archbishop helped and guided me in
those early days when I must have been blundering even
more than I knew. Intimate as the relation must necessarily
be between private secretaries and their chiefs, I doubt
whether in English public life any parallel could be found
to the complete and unreserved confidence which Archbishop
Tait used — quite deliberately — to repose in the man, whoever
he might be, whom he had chosen for the time to be his chap-
lain, his amanuensis and — no other word is possible — his
3 Guardian, January 14, 1903.
438
Randall Thomas Davidson
critic. . . In everything which concerned his public or
official action, however confidential its plan, however personal
its application, he not only permitted but peremptorily
required on the part of his chaplain-secretary the fullest
knowledge and the most frank criticism. . . He was
always in the open air when possible, and many of the most
important and careful letters I can remember had to be
scribbled as best they might while we paced up and down the
gravel walks at Lambeth or the little footpath along the
Broadstairs cliffs. His scribe used to be reduced to sore
straits on a windy day, and we came to the last straw when
he insisted on my revising and annotating a series of visitation
statistics upon sheets of flimsy foolscap while riding with him
on horseback along the Thames Embankment. After the
sorrows of 1878, when he became almost suddenly an old
man, he took to dictating to me the letters of supreme im-
portance only, and contented himself with briefest directions
for the rest. "4
The confidence which Tait thus reposed in his chaplain
led to the latter's acquiring a knowledge of the affairs of
the primacy which was afterwards to prove invaluable to
him. The correspondence concerning the ritual controversy
was almost entirely in Mr. Davidson's hands. His
correspondence with the Rev. Sidney Faithorne Green,
vicar of Miles Platting, Yorkshire, who was committed
to prison for contempt of court on March 19, 1881, is
published in the " Life of Archbishop Tait." The final negotia-
tions with the Rev. A. H. Mackonochie (vide Archbishop
Tait), which came to a crisis when Tait was on his death-bed,
were conducted chiefly by his chaplain, acting on behalf of
the primate.
An able article by Mr. Davidson on "The Authorisation
of the English Bible " appeared in Macmillan's Magazine for
October, 1881, and was warmly praised by Bishop Lightfoot
of Durham, who had appointed him his examining chaplain.
In the following year Mr. Davidson was also appointed one
of the six preachers of Canterbury Cathedral, and honorary
chaplain to Queen Victoria.5
* Life of Archbishop Tait, Vol. II., p. 555.
5 Guardian, January 14, 1903.
439
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
Archbishop Tait's death did not sever Mr. Davidson's
connection with the primacy, for he continued to remain
for a time at Lambeth as domestic chaplain to Archbishop
Benson. Mr. A. C. Benson thus writes of him : " When my
father came to Lambeth Mr. Davidson with great generosity
consented to stay as chaplain, and remained in that capacity
until he was appointed dean of Windsor. Though their
natures were very dissimilar, they became united by the
most intimate and devoted friendship. The present bishop
of Winchester had been brought up in a very different school
of Church feeling ; he had been influenced under the auspices
of his father-in-law in the direction of sagacious statesmanship
and of individual and national rather than ecclesiastical church-
manship. His knowledge of public men, of the work of
organization, of Church legislation, of ecclesiastical move-
ments, was of inestimable value to my father ; moreover, he was
intimately acquainted with the personnel of the Church, and
had the whole of the intricate business of which the primate
is the centre at his fingers' ends. While he was dean of
Windsor my father consulted him on almost every momentous
point or difficult crisis. He did not always follow his advice,
though he had the utmost respect for the bishop's unique
power of foreseeing contingencies ; when Dean Davidson
became bishop of Rochester, and when he succeeded to the
ancient see of Winchester, the intimate relations still con-
tinued, though naturally the bishop had less time at his
disposal. It is not possible to estimate the debt which my
father owed him or the affection with which he regarded
him."6 That Mr. Davidson should have been the trusted coun-
sellor of men of such totally different characters and views as
Tait and Benson is a proof of his wide sympathies, as well as
of his singular capacity for ecclesiastical statecraft. His
mastery of detail is acknowledged by all those who work with
him to be amazing and is quite unsuspected by the many
people who admire him for his thorough grasp of big state
problems.
Queen Victoria's friendship for the Tait family had frequently
brought Mr. Davidson into connection with her Majesty. On
the death of Dr. Wellesley, in 1883, Mr. Davidson was appointed
6 Life of Benson, L, 585.
440
Randall Thomas Davidson
to succeed him as dean of Windsor. In the following year
Dean Davidson received the honorary degree of D.D. from the
University of St. Andrews, and in 1885 was appointed select
preacher at Cambridge.
As dean of Windsor he soon gained, and enjoyed until the
end of her life, the confidence and esteem of Queen Victoria.
When the court was at Windsor there was constant communi-
cation between the sovereign and the dean, and he could
seldom leave the borough without saying where he was to be
found, as at any moment a message might summon him to
her presence, and he would find himself expected to offer
suggestions or supply information on any conceivable matter.7
To these royal claims were added frequent appeals for his
advice from Lambeth. Throughout the Lincoln trial he was
constantly consulted by Archbishop Benson, and was actually
present at many of the sittings.8
While dean of Windsor, he made his mark as an able
speaker in the Canterbury Lower House of Convocation.
In October, 1890, Dr. Davidson was nominated by Lord
Salisbury to succeed Dr. Thorold in the see of Rochester.
The Pall Mall Gazette having referred to the appointment
as a " royal job," Lord Halifax chivalrously wrote a letter
to that journal showing how ungenerous was the criticism,
and pointing out that the dean was giving up a position
which had everything to recommend it for an overburdened
diocese and for hard work among the masses of South and
East London.9 Dr. Davidson was consecrated in West-
minster Abbey on April 25, 1891, by Archbishop Benson
assisted by the bishops of London, Winchester, Lichfield,
Ely, Carlisle, Southwell, Ripon, Colombo, Minnesota and
Bishops Campbell and Barry, the sermon being preached
by his old Harrow headmaster, Dr. Montagu Butler.
After the consecration an interesting ceremony took place
in the Jerusalem Chamber. A large number of those who
had read for their ordination under Dean Vaughan had
subscribed for a gift for Dr. Davidson, the first of their number
to be consecrated to an English bishopric. The gift took
the form of a large silver-gilt flagon, for use in the bishop's
7 Times, Jan. 9, 1903. 8 Ibid.
• Guardian^ Jan. 14, 1903.
441
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
private chapel, the rest of the sacred vessels being given
by other friends.10
The bishop realized the importance of the work in the South
London portion of his diocese and took a small house in the
Kennington Park Road, instead of residing like his predecessors
in a country house. His responsibilities weighed on him
heavily from the first, and there were constant demands for
his presence in different parts of the diocese. Within a week
of his consecration he was attacked with serious gastric trouble,
and it was at one time doubtful if he would recover. He was
ordered to give up work for three months, and thought of
resigning his see, but was dissuaded from this by his friends.
For some years afterwards he was subject at intervals to
similar attacks of illness. He did excellent work, however,
in the diocese of Rochester, and his relations with clergy
and laity were most cordial.
On the death of Dr. Thorold, in 1895, Bishop Davidson was
translated to the see of Winchester, and became ex officio
prelate of the most noble Order of the Garter. Shortly after
his translation to Winchester he was called on to take action
in the case of Father Dolling of St. Agatha's, Landport, who
had erected in his church an altar for masses for the dead.
The bishop had the courage to insist on his admonitions
being obeyed, though the result was the withdrawal of
Father Dolling from the diocese, where he was greatly
beloved. Bishop Davidson was frequently consulted about
ritual difficulties, and in his charge of 1899 he dealt with
private confession. While showing that the Church of
England was positive and clear on the value of private con-
fession for grave and exceptional need, he made it equally
plain that it must remain so limited if the clergy were not
to run the risk of weakening the very characters they longed
to strengthen and uphold.11 He had previously expressed
his conviction that the wisest human counsellor was he who
led the sinner to need human counsel less.
Throughout his episcopate at Winchester, Dr. Davidson
remained the confidential adviser of his sovereign. He was
in attendance on the queen during her last illness, and
was present at her death. The advanced age of Archbishop
10 Ibid. " Ibid.
442
Randall Thomas Davidson
Temple made it necessary for Dr. Davidson to take the
leading part in the arrangements for the coronation of King
Edward VII. For his services on that occasion the king
afterwards conferred on him the insignia of a Knight Com-
mander of the Victorian Order.
In January, 1903, Dr. Davidson was nominated by Mr.
Balfour to succeed Archbishop Temple in the see of Canter-
bury. His promotion had long been anticipated, and had
the choice lain with the suffragans there is little doubt that
he would have been chosen by them unanimously. Probably
no prelate ever came to the chair of St. Augustine better
qualified by experience for the work which lay before
him.
Since his appointment to the episcopal bench, he had taken
the deepest interest in social questions, and was on intimate
terms with the leading men on both sides of political life,
in the Lords and in the Commons. Among the measures
for which he had worked before his elevation to the primacy
were the Act for Infant Life Protection, bills for Prison
Reform, for the Early Closing of Shops, and for securing
Seats for Shop Assistants. He had also taken a leading
part in temperance legislation, and in 1900 introduced three
short bills into the House of Lords : (1) For the reform of
licensing procedure ; (2) for dealing with inebriates ; and (3)
for dealing with the bona fide traveller question.
The archbishop was a strong supporter of Mr. Asquith's
attempted Licensing Bill of 1908. On April 28, 1908, at
the forty-sixth annual meeting of the Church of England
Temperance Society held at Lambeth Palace, after referring
to various aspects of the society's work, he said : " I am
bound to say that the more I regard it the more clearly
convinced do I feel that the larger principles upon which the
Bill is based are principles that are right and just. The
main principle is, I presume, that by such processes as may
be required to effect it, the state shall, or the people of
England shall, for that is the same thing, regain and hold the
controlling power over a trade which stands in some respects
apart from all other trades as to its possible effects upon
national well-being in the lives of the men and women of
England." In November 1908, the archbishop voted with
443
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
the Government in favour of the Licensing Bill, and against
Lord Lansdowne's successful amendment.
In 1904, Dr. Davidson accepted the invitation of the
Episcopal Church in the United States to be present at the
General Convention in Boston in October of that year. In the
course of his American tour he preached at Quebec, Montreal,
Toronto, Washington, Philadelphia, New York, Boston and
many other places, receiving everywhere a hearty welcome.
When addressing the Canada Club at Toronto on September 5,
he said : " When I was a little boy I was taught English
grammar from a little book which I have never since seen.
It had as a frontispiece a picture of a rather fantastic little
lad riding on a white pony, and under the picture were two
lines : —
' Let syntax be your constant guide,
So shall you on a pony ride.'
I confess that in those days I did not clearly see the con-
nection between syntax and horsemanship, but I have since
come to believe that the poet, whoever he was, was right,
and that genuine pains taken to do rightly the immediate
thing will fit us best for whatever may come afterwards,
however different it be."12 Before his return to England, the
universities of Toronto and Columbia (New York) both
conferred on him the honorary degree of LL.D. The sermons
preached by Dr. Davidson in America were afterwards
published under the title of " The Christian Opportunity."
On February 26, 1910, the archbishops of Canterbury and
York issued their first appeal to the Church and people of
England on behalf of Western Canada. To deal with the
needs of the Church in that great country a council was formed,
of which the Archbishops of Canterbury, York and Rupert's
Land are the Presidents. The purpose for which a fund
is required is to supplement the efforts of the Canadian Church
and to fill up what is lacking in its power to help at this crisis
in the Canadian West. A second appeal was issued from the
archbishops in January, 1911, and a third in March, 1913.
The response, though less than had been hoped for, was con-
siderable. Up to Easter 1913, £78,000 had been received.
Forty-two clergy, thirty laymen and four women workers
'- The Christian Opportunity.
444
Randall Thomas Davidson
have been sent out ; £23,000 have been spent in subsidizing
the societies already at work in Canada, and mission centres
have been established at Edmonton, Regina in southern
Alberta, and elsewhere. Archbishop Davidson has encouraged
and supported the work by every means in his power. He
also takes the deepest interest in the progress of the Assyrian
Mission (vide Archbishop Benson).
The archbishop has organized a scheme whereby women
may be trained as qualified teachers in theology. The Diploma
of Student in Theology (S. Th.) is conferred by him at his dis-
cretion upon such candidates as are found to satisfy the test
of (a) systematic study, and (b) proficiency as shown by
examination or otherwise. Those who desire to make Church
teaching their special work may receive in addition to the
Diploma, a Licence to teach theology, which is granted by the
archbishop at his discretion. A Roll is kept of the holders
of the Licence and an annual record of their work. The
standard of examination for the Archbishop's Diploma is
approximately that of the Honours Schools of Theology at
Oxford and Cambridge. All reports of the examinations
are submitted to the archbishop himself, and considered
by him with a view to deciding on whom Diplomas should be
conferred. The first Diplomas were conferred by him in
1906. They are now conferred once a year at a service held
in Lambeth Palace Chapel.
In June 1908, the Pan-Anglican Congress was held, and was
immediately followed by the fifth Lambeth Conference, at which
Archbishop Davidson presided. In 1889, Dr. Davidson had
edited a volume published by the S.P.C.K., giving the official
reports and resolutions together with the sermons preached
at the Lambeth Conferences of 1867, 1878 and 1888. His
report of the Conference of 1897 was afterwards published
separately. The ability and thoroughness with which
he has dealt with these intricate reports has been generally
recognized.
After the Lambeth Conference of 1908 the archbishop and
Mrs. Davidson went to Switzerland for a much needed
holiday. They were accompanied by Dr. Francis Paget,
Bishop of Oxford, between whom and Archbishop Davidson
a close friendship existed. Paget's admiration for the arch-
445
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
bishop was frequently expressed in his letters. On May 7,
1907, he wrote : " I have been in London all this week for
Convocation, staying with the archbishop. It's always a
sort of moral seaside to me to be with him ; he bears his
great load so gallantly, with so ready a heart for tenderness
and sympathy, and so clear and steady a head, and so single
a will, I can't be thankful enough for his friendship."13
Archbishop Davidson ministered to King Edward VII. on
his deathbed and was with him when he died. On May 20,
1910, he officiated, along with the archbishop of York, the
bishops of Winchester and Oxford and the dean of Windsor,
at the funeral of King Edward VII. in St. George's Chapel,
Windsor.
On June 22, 1911, he anointed and crowned King George V.
in Westminster Abbey, afterwards doing homage to his
sovereign, according to custom, in the manner of his famous
predecessors since the time of the Conquest.. " The
enthronement being completed," says the Times, "the
ceremony of the homage, feudal in its origin, was then
performed. The nobles and prelates gathered round the
king on the throne. The archbishop knelt for a moment on
the first step before the throne, and then ascending and
kneeling on the highest step, made the homage for the lords
spiritual in these words : ' I, Randall, Archbishop of Canter-
bury, will be faithful and true, and faith and truth will I
bear unto you, our Sovereign Lord and your heirs of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of
the British Dominions beyond the seas, Defenders of the
Faith and Emperors of India. And I will do, and truly
acknowledge the service of the lands which I claim to hold
of you as in right of the Church, so help me God.' Rising
to his feet, the archbishop then kissed the king on the
left cheek."1*
Shortly after the coronation, King George V. conferred on
the archbishop the Royal Victorian Chain. His Grace is one
of the Lords of the Privy Council ; Visitor of All Souls, Merton
and Keble Colleges, Oxford ; of King's College, London, of
Marlborough College, of Dulwich College, of St. Augustine's
'•' Life of Bishop Francis Paget, p. 286.
M Times, June 23, 191 1.
446
Randall Thomas Davidson
College, Canterbury, and with the bishop of London of Harrow
School. He is also a Governor of Harrow and of Wellington
College, of Holloway College, and of the Charterhouse. He
is President of the Corporation of the Sons of the Clergy,
President of the S.P.C.K. and of the S.P.G., of the National
Society and of the Incorporated Church Building Society,
and a Principal Trustee of the British Museum. In addition
to the honorary degrees already mentioned which have been
conferred on him, he is an LL.D. of Cambridge University,
a D.C.L. of Oxford University, a D.D. of Aberdeen University,
and an LL.D. of Edinburgh University. In 1903 he was
elected an honorary fellow of Trinity College, Oxford.15
Archbishop Davidson, like all his predecessors, since
1811, is President of the National Society for the Promotion
of the Education of the Poor in the Principles of the Church
of England. He has held that position during a period of
exceptional difficulty, for the Government since the end of
1905 has been openly opposed to denominational instruction
as part of the nation's system of education. The present
primate has, throughout this period, exhibited a keen and
anxious appreciation of the magnitude of the issues involved
Burdened, as he is, with vast and varied responsibilities, he
has unsparingly devoted time and strength to the treatment
of the changing phases of the Education Question and the
Duties of the Church in connection therewith. There was a
time, in 1908, when the archbishop and most of his episcopal
colleagues were disposed to favour the acceptance of a Bill
framed by Mr. Runciman which would have had the effect of
terminating the existence, as such, of very large numbers
of Church Schools in the country districts, but would in return
have enacted the general establishment of facilities for denomi-
national instruction in schools maintained by public funds.
The great majority of Church educationists, and the National
Society as a body, were, however, very strongly opposed to
the Runciman Bill, and the Government withdrew it as in-
viting concessions which, from their point of view, it was not
worth while making except as part of a settlement by consent.
Dr. Davidson, notwithstanding the difference of opinion
which has been mentioned, continued to give his powerful
»5 Crockford's Clerical Directory, 1913.
447
A Chronicle of the Archbishops of Canterbury
co-operation to the National Society's work in the most
effective fashion. With his entire sympathy, the Society,
besides helping Church School Managers to meet the
demands of the Board of Education in regard to the
improvement of their buildings, spent money freely on
enabling them to carry to a successful issue litigation under-
taken in order to secure from the Law Courts authoritative
declarations in support of the claim of denominational
schools to be treated, administratively, under the Education
Act of 1902, on a basis of perfect equality with the schools
provided by the local education authorities.
Both privately and in many public speeches, the Arch-
bishop has given strenuous and most valuable support to the
Society's appeals for the largely increased funds required to
enable it to discharge in the fullest and worthiest manner the
services just mentioned to Church Schools, and the duty of
helping the Church Training Colleges, to which he attaches
the greatest importance, through a time of difficulty and
anxiety. The National Society has also had the heartiest
support from his Grace in its endeavours to develop public
opinion in the direction of a permanent settlement of the
Education Question on the basis of the right of parents to
determine the character of the religious instruction to be
received by their children in the schools to which they are
obliged to send them.16
Dr. Davidson's principal published works are : " The
Lambeth Conferences " (second edition, 1896) ; " The
Christian Opportunity " (1904) ; " Captains and Comrades
of the Faith " (1911) ; "The Character and Call of the Church
of England " (1912) ; a number of sermons and charges.
He is also the joint author of " The Life of Archbishop
Tait" (1891).
16 From information kindly supplied by Mr. Talbot Baines, Secretary
to the National Society.
448
LIST OF PRINCIPAL WORKS CONSULTED
Historia Monasterii S. Augustini Cantuariensis, by Thomas of Elmham.
Edited by Charles Hardwick, M.A. Rolls Series. (London, 1858.)
De Gestis Pontificum Anglorum, Willelmi Malmesbiriensis Monachi.
Libri quinque, edited by N. E. S. A. Hamilton. Rolls Series.
(London, 1870).
Memorials of Saint Dunstan, edited from various manuscripts by
William Stubbs. Rolls Series. (London, 1874).
Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury,
edited by J. C. Robertson, M.A. 7 vols. Rolls Series. (London,
1875)-
The Historical Works of Gervase of Canterbury, edited from the manu-
scripts by William Stubbs, D.D. 2 vols. Rolls Series. (London,
1879).
Registrum epistolarum Fratris Johannis Peckham, edited by Charles T.
Martin, B.A. 3 vols. Rolls Series. (London, 1882).
Historia Ecclesiae Dunhelmensis, Simeonis Monachi, edited by Thomas
Arnold, M.A. Rolls Series. (London, 1882).
Eadmeri Historia Novorum in Anglia, edited by Martin Rule, M.A.
Rolls Series. (London, 1884.)
De Gestis Regum Anglorum Willelmi Malmesbiriensis Monachi, Libri
quinque. 2 vols., edited by William Stubbs, D.D. Rolls Series.
(London, 1887.)
Codex Diplomaticus Aevi Saxonici, Johannis M. Kemble. 6 vols.
English Hist. Soc. (London, 1839.)
Concilia Magnae Britanniae et Hiberniae, edited by David Wilkins.
4 vols. (London, 1737.)
Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain and
Ireland, edited after Spelman and Wilkins by Haddan and
Stubbs. 3 vols. (Oxford, 1869.)
Anglia Sacra, edited by Henry Wharton. 2 vols. (London, 1691).
Chronicle of Florence of Worcester, translated by T. Forester. Bonn's
edition. (London, 1854).
History of the English, by Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon. Trans-
lated by T. Forester. Bohn's edition. (London, 1853).
Annals of Roger of Hoveden. Bohn's edition. 2 vols. (London,
1853O
Flowers of History, Roger of Wendover. Bohn's edition. 2 vols.
(London, 1349.)
449
List of Principal Works Consulted
Ecclesiastical History of England, by Bede. Sellar's trans. (London
1907.)
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Bohn's edition. (London, 1847.)
Monasticon Anglicanum, by Sir William Dugdale. 8 vols. (London,
1846.)
Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica, T. Tanner. (London, 1748.)
Biographia Britannica, second edition by A. Kippis. 5 vols. (London,
1 778-1 793.)
Calendars of State Papers. Rolls Series. (London, 1867, etc.)
Chronica. G. Thorn. Twysden's edition. (London, 1852.)
Biographia Britannica Literaria, by Thomas Wright. 2 vols. (Lon-
don, 1842, 1846.)
Athenae Oxoniensis, by Anthony a Wood. Edited by P. Bliss. (Ox-
ford, 1848.)
Athenae Cantabrigiensis, by C. H. and T. Cooper. (Cambridge, 1858
to 1913.)
The Judges of England, by E. Foss. 9 vols. (London, 1848 to 1864.)
Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages, edited by E. F. Hender-
son. London, 1892.)
Dictionary of Christian Biography during First Eight Centuries, edited
by Smith and Wace. 4 vols. (London, 1882.)
Cyprianus Anglicus, by Peter Heylyn. (London, 1668). fol.
The Autobiography of Dr. William Laud. A compilation from his Diary.
(Oxford, 1839.)
The Antiquities of Canterbury, by William Somner. (London, 1640.)
A Catalogue of the Bishops of England, by Francis Godwin. (London,
1601.)
Lives of the Protestant Bishops of the Church [of England since the
Reformation, by John Le Neve. (London, 1720.)
Worthies of All Souls. Montagu Burrows. (Oxford, 1874.)
Historical Memorials of Canterbury, by A. P. Stanley, Dean of West-
minster. (London, 1904.)
History of England, by J. A. Froude. 12 vols. (London, 1870-75.)
The Conquest of England. John Richard Green. (London, 1883.)
The Making of England. John Richard Green. (London, 1897.)
History of the Norman Conquest of England, E. A. Freeman. 6 vols.
(Oxford, 1867-79.)
Illustrations of the Literary History of the Eighteenth Century, J. Nichols.
8 vols. (London, 1817-1858.)
Memorials of Thomas Cranmer. J. Strype. 2 vols. (Oxford, 1812.)
Lives of Archbishops Grindal, Parker and Whitgift. J. Strype. 7 vols.
(Oxford, 1821, 1822.)
Student's History of England. S. R. Gardiner. (London, 1892.)
450
List of Principal Works Consulted
History of his own Time. G.Burnet. 6 vols. (Oxford, 1823.)
Diary and Correspondence of J. Evelyn. Edited by W. Bray. 4 vols.
(London, 1850-52.)
Paston Letters (1422-1509), edited by J. Gairdner. 4 vols. (London,
1891-1908.)
Chapters of Early Church History. William Bright. Second Edition.
(Oxford, 1888.)
The Gentleman's Magazine.
The Annual Register.
Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, W. F. Hook. 12 vols. (London,
1860-76.)
Dictionary of National Biography, edited by Leslie Stephen and Sidney
Lee. Reissue. (London, 1908, etc.)
History of the Church of England. R. W. Dixon. 6 vols. (London,
1878-1902.)
The English Church in the reigns of Elizabeth and James I. W. H. Frere.
(London, 1904.)
The English Church and its Bishops. Charles J. Abbey. 2 vols.
(London, 1887.)
The English Church. W. H. Hutton. (London, 1903.)
The English Church from the accession of George I. to the end of the
Eighteenth Century, J. H. Overton and F. Relton. (London, 1906.)
The English Church in the Nineteenth Century. J. H. Overton.
(London, 1894.)
The Church of England : a History for the People. H. D. M. Spence,
afterwards Spence-Jones, Dean of Gloucester. 4 vols. (London,
1904-5.)
Lambeth Palace and its Associations. J. Cave Browne. (Edinburgh
1883.)
4Si
INDEX
Abbot, George, 333-338 ; fatal
. shooting accident, 336.
A Becket, Thomas, see Thomas a
Becket,
Aberconway, 219.
Abercorn, Marquis of, 395.
Abergwilly, 263.
Abingdon, 101, 105, 107, 120, 129,
201.
Acle or Oakley, 67.
Acre, 185.
Adam de Chillenden, 211, 212.
Adam of Orlton, Bishop of Here-
ford, 225.
Addington, 393, 394, 398, 402, 403,
407, 416, 434, 437.
Adela, Countess of Blois, 146.
Adela, Queen of Henry I., 153.
" Advertisements " of Parker, 317.
Agapetus II., Pope, 86.
Agatho, Pope, 40.
Agilbert, 31, 34, 37.
Agincourt, 265.
Agnus Dei, at Communion, 422.
Aidan, 30.
Airey, Dr., 340.
Aix, 11.
Albano, Cardinal of, 232.
Alberic, Bishop of Ostria, 159.
Albinus, Abbot, 48, 49.
Alcuin, 64, 65.
Aldfrid, King of Northumbria, 43,
44.
Aldhelm, Abbot of Glastonbury, 45.
Aldon, Sir Thomas of, 248.
Aldred, Archbishop of York, 127.
Aldwin, Bishop of Lichfield, 47.
Aldwulf, Bishop of Rochester, 47.
Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln, 158.
Alexander I., King of Scotland, 153.
Alexander II., Pope, 128, 132, 133.
Alexander III., Pope, 171, 175,
178, 180.
Alexander V., Pope, 264.
Alexander VI., Pope, 147, 284, 288.
Alfred, brother of Edward the Con-
fessor, 122.
Alfred the Great, 75-79.
Alfric, see Elfric.
Alfric, Alderman, 103.
Algar, or Ethelgar, 10 1, 102.
Aller, 76.
Allingham, 180.
All Souls, Oxford, 266.
Alpheah, see Elphege.
Alresford, 395.
Alwig, Bishop of Lindsey, 48.
Amesbury, 106.
Amiens, 215.
Ampthill, 298.
Anagni, 178.
" Analogy," Butler's, 385.
Anastatius IV., Pope, 163.
Andover, no, 395.
Andrewes, Lancelot, Bishop of Ely,
333-
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 44, 72, 78,
106, in, 118.
Anlaf the Dane, 94.
Anne Boleyn, 296, 297, 298, 307,
3*4-
Anne of Cleves, 298.
Anne, Queen, 367.
Anselm of Bee, 113, 132, 139-148,
155; canonization, 147.
Anselm of Milan, 132.
Anselm of St. Sabas, 151.
Antwerp, 290.
Aosta, 139.
Appeals to Papal Courts, forbidden,
240.
Aquila, 218.
Archbishops, appointment by
Kings, 116; ditto and papal
rights, 125 ; privileges of, 59, 60.
Arches, Court of, 231, 238, 245,
263, 269, 272, 281, 290, 402.
Armada, Spanish, 326.
Arnold, Headmaster of Rugby, 409.
Arnold, Matthew, 431.
Arnulf, Count of Flanders, 96.
Arras, 273.
Arthur, King, 89.
Arthur of Brittany, 189.
Arthur, son of Henry VII., 288,
291.
45^
Index
Articles of Religion, 301, 317, 326,
341, 409.
Arundel, Earl of, 256, 257.
Arundel, Thomas, 255-259 ; trans-
lation from York, 256 ; impeach-
ment, 257, 261, 272.
Ashdon, 315.
Ashford, 387.
Asiatic cholera, in London, 413.
Aslacton, 295.
Asquith, Mr. , 443.
Assandun, 124.
Asser, 74, 75, 78, 318.
Assyrian Christians, Missions to
423, 445-
Asterius, Bishop of Genoa, 31.
Astran, council of, 73.
Athanasian Creed, disputes on, 414.
Athelhard, see Ethelheard.
Athelm, 81.
Athelm, protector of Odo, 84, 85.
Athelney, 76.
Athelred, see Ethelred.
Athelstan, 81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 89, 91.
Attercliffe, 381.
Audley, Lord Chancellor, 315.
Augustine, St., 9-16, 5°i 5i» 53.
66, 86 ; mission of, 11-12 ;
ordained Bishop of the English,
13 ; writings of, 213, 318 ;
commemoration of, 435.
Aust (Augustine's oak), 14.
Avalonia (Glastonbury), 89.
Averham-with-Kelham, 392.
Avignon, 221, 227, 228, 231, 236,
243, 244, 245, 247, 307.
Avranches, 130, 139.
Axon, 427.
Aylmer, half-brother of Henry III.,
209.
Baccancelde, council of, 44.
Badam (or Habam), council of, 114.
Badby, John, burned for heresy,
258.
Bagot, Bishop, 409.
Baker, Harriet, 418.
Baker, John, stepfather of Arch-
bishop Parker, 314.
Baker, Sir Thomas, 418.
Baldon, 409.
Baldwin, 181-185 ; dispute with
the Pope, 183 ; crusade, 184-185.
Balfour, Mr., 443.
Ball, John, 249.
Bamborough, 282.
Bampton Lectures, 431.
Bancroft, Richard, 328, 330-332.
Bangor, 287, 376, 379, 390.
Bangorian controversy, 370.
Bangor Iscoed, 15.
Bannockburn, 224.
Bapchild (Baccancelde), 44.
Baptismal regeneration, dispute
concerning, 401.
Baptism of Saxons at Canterbury,
13-
Barfleur, 178.
Bari, council of, 145.
Barking, 346.
Barley, 376.
Barlow, Bishop of Chichester, 316.
Barnet, battle of, 282.
Barons' revolt against John, 195,
against Henry III., 209.
Barrington, Shute, Bishop of Dur-
ham, 400.
Bartholomew, Bishop of Exeter,i8i.
Bath, 108, 178, 199, 253.
Bath and Wells, 211, 214, 268, 341.
Battle Abbey, 143, 275.
Bayeux Tapestry, 127.
Beauchamp, Cecilia, 281.
Beauchamp, Guy de, 2nd earl
of Warwick, 427.
Beaufort, Henry, Bishop of Win-
chester and Cardinal, 265, 266,
269, 270, 272, 273, 274.
Bee, 131, 132, 136, 140, 141, 159,
I77» 314-
Beckett, Gilbert, 165.
Bede, 48, 49 (and references).
Bedford, Duke of, brother of Henry
V., 264.
Beggars' Opera, 378.
Belley, Burgundy, 206.
Belli, John, 398.
Benedict Biscop, 37, 38, 41, 42.
Benedict VIII., Pope, 114, 116.
Benedict IX., Pope, 119.
Benedict X., Pope, 126.
Benedict XIII., Pope, 264.
Benedictines, 86, 87, 94, 96, 97,
101, 131, 138, 281.
Benefices, Pope and presentation
to English, 240.
Benevento, 151.
Benevolences, 284.
Benson, A. C, 425, 440.
Benson, E. F., 425.
Benson, Edward White, 418-426,
430, 440, 441.
Benson, Martin, Bishop of Glou-
cester, 381.
453
Index
Benson, R. H., 425.
Beornwulf, King of Mercia, 67.
Beorwald, Abbot of Glastonbury,
46.
Beranger of Tours, 132.
Bere Regis, 281.
Berkeley Castle, 225.
Berkeley, Sir Henry, 326.
Bernard of Clairvaux, 161, 162.
Berners, Lord, 276.
Bertha, Queen, 10, 12.
Bertha, wife of Ranulf de Glanville,
186.
Bethlehem, 187.
Bible, division into chapters, 193;
in English, 298, 299 ; in parish
churches, 299 ; Bishops', 317 ;
Authorized Version, 331, 334.
Bilsington, 241.
Birinus, 30-32.
Birmingham, 418.
Bishops, Suffragan, 414.
Bishops Sutton, 395.
Bishopsthorpe, 377.
Black Death, 235, 236, 238, 240,
245-
Black Friars, 211, 252.
Blackheath, 270.
Black Joan, wife of Cranmer, 295.
Black Prince, 239, 248, 251.
Blandford, 369.
Bletchingley, 376.
Bliss, Professor, 389.
Blokesworth, 281.
Bocher, Joan, burnt for heresy, 300.
Bodleian Library, 154, 213, 341.
Boernhelm, Bishop, 98.
Bohun, Humphrey, Earl of Here-
ford, 251.
Bohun, Margaret, 251.
Bonaventura, Cardinal, 285.
Boniface of Savoy, 205 ; dispute
with St. Paul's, 207, 206-210 ;
violence of, 208.
Boniface, Bishop, 45, 50, 53, 54.
Boniface IV., Pope, 22.
Boniface V., Pope, 23, 25, 26.
Boniface VIII., Pope, 219, 220, 221,
222.
Boniface IX., Pope, 257.
Bonner, Bishop of London, 303,
312.
Bonneville, 131.
Bonville, Lord, 274.
Boscombe, 327.
Boston, America, 444.
Bosworth Field, battle of, 27y.
Boulogne, 209.
Bourchier, Thomas, 276-280 ;
created Cardinal, 278 ; household
accounts, 280.
Bourchier, Viscount, 276, 277.
Bow Church, 430.
Bowlby, Dr., Bishop of Coventry,
438.
Bracon Ash, 365, 366.
Bradford, John, 324.
Bradford Peverall, 395.
Bradwardine, Thomas, 235-237.
Brampford Speke, 401.
Braybrooke, Robert, Bishop of
London, 261.
Brechin, 334.
Brecknock, 182, 283.
Bredon, 47.
Bregwin, 56-58.
Bretwalda, 10, 69.
Brihtwald, 43-46.
Bristol, siege of, 257, 382.
Broad Chalk, 402.
Broadstairs, 439.
BrontS, Charlotte, 406.
Brooks, Bishop of Gloucester, 302.
Browne, Dr. Harold, Bishop of
Winchester, 418.
Browning, Robert, 431.
Bruges, 248.
Brunanburh, battle of 85.
Buckhurst, Lord, Puritan Leader,
334-
Buckingham, Duke of, 276, 277,
283.
Burghley, see Cecil.
Burgundy, Duke of, 273, 282.
Burial Act, 415.
Burlingham, 315.
Burnet, Gilbert, Bishop of Salis-
bury, 362, 363.
Burning of a monk, 197.
Bury, Richard, Bishop of Durham,
236.
Bury St. Edmunds, 219, 355.
Butler, Dr. Montagu, 441.
Butler, Joseph, Bishop of Durham,
381, 382, 384.
Butler, Marquesses of Ormonde,
191.
Butler's Analogy, 385.
Button, William, Bishop of Bath
and Wells, 211.
Byrthelm, Bishop of Wells, 96.
Cade, Jack, 270, 274.
Caedwalla, King of West Saxons, 46.
454
Index
Caen, 133.
Calais, 256, 260, 270, 273.
Caldecot, 226.
Calixtus II., Pope, 152, 156.
Calne, 202; council and miracle
at, 98.
Calvinism, 316, 321, 327, 334, 337,
339, 355, 362-
Cambray, 308.
Cambridge, 223, 245, 246, 285, 295,
296, 312, 314, 315, 318, 320,
323, 324, 325, 328, 330, 332,
355, 357, 365, 376, 379, 392,
400, 419.
Cambridge, Archdeacon, 393.
Campbell, Hay, 408.
Campbell, John, 437.
Campbell, Sir Hay, 408.
Canada, work in, 444.
Candles, lighted on altar, 422.
Canonical Scriptures, 402, 407.
Canon Law, 197, 301.
Canterbury, 99, 135, 203, 250, 311,
318, 387, 424 ; Augustine at, 12 ;
fire at, 23 ; captured by Danes,
in.
Canterbury Cathedral of Christ-
church, 54, 57, 69, 86, 119, 120,
182, 190, 199, 207,, 211, 216,
226, 241, 254, 259 265, 284,
330, 424, 434, 436 ; building of,
13 ; fire at, 178 ; library, 104 ;
burnt by Danes, 112 ; rebuilt,
134 ; consecrated, 157 ; monks
banished by John, 193 ; monks
excommunicated, 204 ; regis-
ters of, 213 ; monastic founda-
tion reorganised, 299.
Canterbury, Primacy of, 23, 26,
29, 43, 44, 48, 50, 65, 134, 147,
151, 156, 157, 179, 188, 225, 239,
279.
Canterbury, Viscount, 394.
Cardinal-bishop, appointment of
Archbishop as, 213.
Carlisle, 410 ; earl of, 432.
Caroline, Queen of George II., 373,
374, 382.
Caroline, Queen of George IV., 395.
Cartwright, Thomas, Puritan
leader, 325.
Carveth, Richard, 427.
Catesby, Northants, 202.
Catherine Howard, 298.
Catherine of Aragon, 291, 293, 298,
302, 307.
Catholic claims, 393, 396.
Catholics, laws against, 331.
Cealchyth ( ? Chelsea) councils at,
61,68.
Cecil, Elizabeth's minister, 316, 320,
322, 326, 327.
Cedd, Bishop of London, 33.
Celestine V., Pope, 218.
Ceolnoth, 72-74.
Ceolwulf, King of Mercia, 67.
Ceolwulf, King of Northumbria, 47.
Cerne Abbey, 281.
Chad, 36, 38, 39, 41.
Chalmers, Dr., 399.
Cham part (or Robert), 121-123.
Chandler, Samuel, nonconformist
divine, 381.
Charibert, King of Paris, 10.
Charlemagne, 60, 63, 64, 67, 76.
Charles I., 337, 34I"349-
Charles II., 35<>350» 362, 366.
Charles V., Emperor, 296, 297, 307,
308, 309, 310.
Charlett, Dr., 373.
Charlotte, Queen of George III.,
395-
Charter of Henry I., 195.
Chartist Riots, 433.
Chartres, Cathedral of, 117.
Chaucer, 237.
Cheam, 404.
Cheddar, 92.
Chelsea, 61, 68, 332.
Chester, 179, 281, 356, 400.
Cheyne, Sir John, 264.
Chich, 155.
Chichele, Henry, 263-267, 274.
Chichester, 207, 227, 235, 245, 253,
273, 347-
Chillenden, Thomas, prior of
Christ Church Canterbury, 262.
Chillingworth, Dr. William, 362.
Chinon, 184.
Chippenham, 202.
Cholsey, 105.
Christendom, Union of 424.
Church Association, 422.
Church Building Society, 393.
Church Calendar, reform of, 317.
Church, Dean, 418.
Church Defence and Instruction,
Central Committee of, 423.
Church, first Christian in Britain,
89.
Church, Henry VIII 's claim to be
Head of, 293.
Church Missionary Society, 391,
431-
455
Index
Church, National, 251, 316, 326.
Church Oakley, 290.
Church of England Temperance
Society, 443.
Church Patronage Bill, 422.
Civil War, 344.
Clarence, brother of Edward IV.,
282, 306.
Clarendon, Constitutions of, 169,
170, 171, 172.
Clarendon, Lord, 338, 352, 353.
Clarke, Dr. Samuel, 381.
Clement, Anti-Pope, 142, 143.
Clement V., Pope, 221-224.
Clement VI., Pope, 238; over-ruling
Archbishop, 239.
Clement VII., Pope, 293, 296.
Clement XI., Pope, 370.
Clergy Discipline Bill, 422.
Clerical subscription, 412.
Clerics and secular offices, 189, 199.
"Clericis Laicos," Bull of Pope
Boniface VIII., 219.
Cliffe, 245.
Clifford, Bishop of Worcester, 262.
Clovesho, 39, 53, 63, 65.
Cluny, 96.
Cnut, 107, 114, 117.
Cobham, Lord, 258, 259.
Coin, pagan priest, 26.
Coinage, Archbishops' rights of, 60,
67, 83, 191.
Coke, Lord, 331.
Cole, Dr., Provost of Eton, 303.
Colenso, Dr., Bishop of Natal, 406,
407, 411.
Colet, 291, 306, 315.
Colman, Bishop of Lindisfarne,
34-
Columbia University of New York,
444.
Columban, Abbot, 18.
Columban, refractory monk of
St. Augustine's, 135.
Communion Table, position of,
340» 342-
Conference of Augustine and Welsh
bishops, 14, 15.
Confession, 114, 225, 411, 442.
Confiscation of Church Property by
Henry II., 172.
Congleton, Lord, 405.
Consecrated wafer used as evi-
dence, 415.
Constance, Council of, 265.
Constans II., Emperor, 37.
Conventicle Acts, 353.
Convocation, 270, 278, 293, 322,
343. 363, 367, 37°, 4°2> 4*4-
Conybeare, Rev. W. J., 435.
Conyngham, Marquis of, 396.
Corbeil, 155 (see William deCorbeil).
Corfe Castle, 99.
Cornwallis, Frederick, 386-388.
Cornwallis, General, 386.
Cornwallis, Mrs., and entertain-
ments, 387.
Coronation, Archbishop's privi-
lege, 153.
Corporation of the Sons of the
Clergy, 380, 390.
Cottenham, 365.
Cottingham, 330.
Council of English Church, first, 38.
Courtenay Hugh, Earl of Devon,
251-
Courtenay, William, 248, 251-254.
Coventry, 116, 261, 386.
Coverdale, 316.
Cowley, 258, 404.
Cox, Dr., Bishop of Ely, 325, 330.
Cranbrook, 387.
Cranmer, Thomas, 295-305, 314 ;
charged with treason and heresy,
302 ; excommunication of, 303 ;
recantation, 303 ; martyrdom,
304-
Crecy, 234, 236, 238.
Crediton, 95.
Creighton, Dr., Bishop of Peter-
borough, 427.
Cromwell, Oliver, 362.
Cromwell, Thomas, 299.
Cross, sign of the, 422.
Croydon, 245, 319, 323, 328, 335,
337, 350, 353, 37i» 375, 378, 380,
393-
Crusades, 184, 185, 186, 202, 209,
212, 288.
Culmstock Devon, 427.
Cumberland, Duke of, victor of
Culloden, 377.
Cumlodden, 408.
Curate chained to altar rails, 421.
Curia Regis, 186.
Curwen, Dr. Hugh, Archbishop of
Dublin, 330.
Cuthbert, 50, 52-55.
Cuthred, viceroy in Kent, 67.
Cwenthritha, 69.
Cynegils, King of Wessex, 31.
Cynewulf , King of Wessex, 59.
Cynsthryth, mother of Dunstan,
90.
456
Index
Dagan, Bishop, 18.
Daraianus, Bishop of Rochester, 33.
Danegeld, 104.
Danes, in England, 61, 73, 75, 76,
86, 94, 97, 103, 108-119.
Daniel, Bishop of Winchester, 46,
47-
Danish Bishoprics, Englishmen in,
117.
Dartford, 438.
Dartmoor, 431.
Dartmouth, 282.
David, King of Scotland, 156.
Davidson, Randall, 394, 398, 427,
437-447-
Deane, Henry, 286-289 ; dispute
with nobles, 287.
Dean, first mention of, 72.
De Beauvais, Cardinal, 243.
De Broc family, 174.
Deceased Wife's Sister Bill, 402.
Declaration of Indulgence, 357.
Deerhurst, monastery of, 108.
De Morville, Hugh, 174.
Dereham, 191.
De Tracy, William, 174.
Deusdedit, 32-35.
Devil and St. Dunstan, legend of, 92.
Devon, Earl of, 340.
Dinooth, Abbot, 15.
Diplomas in Theology granted to
Women, 445.
Disestablishment, Irish, 413, 433 ;
Welsh, 423.
Disraeli, Mr., 413.
Dissenters, 381, 387, 393, 398 (See
also Nonconformity).
Divorce, 39.
Dockers' strike, 433.
Dolling, Father, 442.
Domesday Book, 141.
Dorchester, 31.
Dover, 144, 209, 236, 241, 311, 387,
433-
Down and Connor, 393.
D'Oyly, Dr., 393.
Dudley, Lord Guildford, 302.
Dun, Abbot, 48.
Dunbar, Earl of, 334.
Duncombe, William, 376, 377.
Dunstable, 208, 298.
Dunstan, 81, 86, 87, 89-103,
109, 125 ; banished, 95 ;
restored, 96 ; canonized, 100.
Dunwich, 30.
Duppa, Brian, Bishop of Salis-
bury, 349, 365.
Durham, 150, 155, 272, 356, 382,
390, 400, 406, 419, 430.
Eadbald, King of Kent, 19-20, 31.
Eadbert, King of Kent, 43, 47, 49,
Eadbert Pren, King of Kent, 63, 64.
Eadgifu, 94.
Eadmer, 141, 153.
Eadsige, or Eadsine, 1 19-120.
Eanbald, Archbishop of York, 65.
Eanwulf, 47.
Earconbert, King of Kent, 28.
Early closing of shops, 443.
Easter, controversy concerning 14,
15. 18, 34, 39, 45-
Eastern Church, 371, 397.
Easton, 238.
Eastry, 69.
Eastward position, 422.
Ebbs Fleet, 435.
Ebroin of Aries, 37.
Ecclesiastical laws, Athelstan's code
of, 83, ; Odo's 87.
Ecclesiastical Courts, 270, 331 ;
Henry II. and Becket, 168-170.
Eden, Sir Robert, 391.
Edgar, 89, 95, 96, 97. 98, 109.
Edgar Atheling, 127.
Edgitha, Queen of Edward the
Confessor, 122, 128.
Edinburgh, 342, 408, 434, 437.
Edith, Queen of Henry II., 146.
Edith, sister of Athelstan, 82.
Edmonton, Canada, 445.
Edmund the King, St., 205.
Edmund I., 84, 86, 89, 92-94.
Edmund Ironside, 114, 115.
Edmund, King of East Anglia, 74.
Edmund Rich of Abingdon, 201-
205 ; canonization, 205.
Edred, 84, 86, 89, 91, 94.
Education of the poor, 393, 432,
433-
Edward de la Dene, 227.
Edward the Confessor, 119, 121,
122, 124, 126.
Edward the Elder, 78, 79, 81, 82.
Edward the Martyr, 89, 98.
Edward I., 211-221.
Edward II., 221, 223-225.
Edward III., 225, 227-228, 264.
Edward IV., 278, 282, 283.
Edward V., 283.
Edward VI., 295, 300-301, 310,
315. 32i-
Edward VII., 421, 434, 443, 446.
457
30
Index
Edward, son of Henry VI., 274, 281,
282.
Edwin, Earl, 127.
Edwin, King of Northumbria, 26,
29.
Edwy, 84, 87, 89, 95 ; divorce, 96.
Egbert, Archbishop of York, 48, 50,
75, 59-
Egbert, King of Kent, 36, 37.
Egbert, King of Wessex, 67, 72,
73-
Egfert, King of Mercia, 63.
Egfrid, King of Northumbria, 36,
39, 40, 41.
Eglaf, in.
Eleanor, Queen of Henry II., 187.
Eleanor, Queen of Henry III., 203,
206.
Eleanor, sister of Henry III., 204.
Elector Palatine, 335.
Elf mar, traitor, in.
Elf red, rival to Athelstan, 82.
Elfric the grammarian, 104, 105.
Elfric, 105-107.
Elfric, monk of St. Augustine's,
121, 122.
Elfsin, 96.
Elgifu, wife of Edwy, 87, 95, 96.
Elizabeth, daughter of Edward I.,
251.
Elizabeth of York, 279.
Elizabeth, Queen, 298, 313, 314-
328 ; excommunicated, 317.
Elmdon, 409.
Elmham, 124, 125.
Elphege, 91, 108-113 ; taken pris-
oner and murdered, 112, 113.
Elphere, 98.
Elstan (see Lyving.)
Ely, 128, 129, 242, 255, 276, 277,
283, 284, 285.
Emancipation Bill (Catholic), 396.
Emma, Queen, 117, 118, 124.
Emsham, 201.
Endowments of the Church, 73.
English in Church services, 299.
Enham, council of, no.
Enraght, Rev. R. W., 415.
Episcopacy, 321, 326, 327, 330, 333,
334, 34i, 343-
Erasmus, 291, 306.
Ermenberga, mother of Anselm,
139-
Ernulf, Bishop of Rochester, 150.
Esher, 238.
Essays and Reviews, 402, 412, 429,
430, 43i-
Essex, earl of, 327.
Established Church of Scotland, 383.
Estrefeld, 44.
Ethandune, battle of, 76.
Ethelbald, King of Mercia, 47, 34,
61.
Ethelbald, King of Wessex, 72.
Ethelbert, King of Kent, 10, 12,
13, 14, 18, 19, 22.
Ethelbert II., King of Kent, 48, 56.
Ethelbert, King of Wessex, 72.
Ethelburga, 26.
Etheldreda, 39.
Ethelfrith, Bishop of Elmham, 50.
Ethelgar, 94, 101-102.
Ethelgifu, 95.
Ethelgiva, patroness of Dunstan,
92.
Ethelheard or Athelhard, 63-65.
Ethelmaer, 124.
Ethelnoth or Egelnodus, 72, 116-
118.
Ethelred or Athelred, 75-77.
Ethelred, alderman, 109.
Ethelred, King of Mercia, 36, 41,
43. 46.
Ethelred I., King of Wessex, 72, 75.
Ethelred II., the Unready, 89, 98,
99, 101, 103, 108, 114, 115.
Ethelric, Bishop of Selsey, 118.
Ethelward, alderman, 103.
Ethelwold, Bishop of Winchester,
97, [OX, 109.
Ethelwulf, King of Wessex, 70, 72,
73-
Eton College, foundation of, 269,
400.
Eugenius III., Pope, 162.
Eugenius IV., Pope, 266, 274.
Evangelical party, 393, 40 1.
Eustace, son of Stephen, 163.
Evesham monastery, founding of,
46.
Ewe, Earl of, 276.
Ewell, 194.
Excommunication, of England, 79 ;
of Stigand, 125 ; of bishops by
Becket, 173 ; of William of
Eynsford, 168 ; of De Broc
family by Becket, 174 ; of John,
194 ; of monks of Canterbury,
204 ; of Dean and Chapter of St.
Paul's, 208 ; of murderers, 228 ;
of Archbishop Simon Meopham,
230 ; of Bishop of Salisbury, 253 ;
of Cranmer, 303 ; of Henry VIII.,
309]; of Elizabeth, 317.
458
Index
Exeter, 181, 228, 229, 251, 253, 260,
306, 370, 401, 430, 431, 433.
Faricius of Abingdon, 149.
Falkland, 351.
Farmer Antony, 357.
Farn worth, 330.
Fasting, 114.
Faversham, 193, 207, 288.
Felix, 30.
Felixstowe, 30.
Fenny Drayton, 260.
Feologeld (or Theologild), 71.
Fire of London, 353, 356.
Fisher the Jesuit, 340.
Fitzalan, Richard, Earl of Arundel,
255-
Fitzherbert, William, Archbishop of
York, consecrated by Henry II.,
160.
FitzOsbert, William, demagogue,
189.
Fitzurse, Reginald, 174.
Fitzwaryn, Lord, 276.
Five Mile Act, 353.
Flambard, Ralph, Bishop of Dur-
ham, 155.
Fleetwood, Dr., Bishop of Ely,
376, 379-
Fleury, 86, 88.
Florence, 257, 306.
Florentines, Bull against, 251.
Folkestone, 119.
Ford, 181, 337.
Fordham, 260.
Formosus, Pope, 79.
Forster, Mr., 433.
Fortescue, Sir John, 282.
Forthere, Bishop of Sherborne, 46.
Fox, Dr., Lord High Almoner, 296.
Foxe, John, 321.
Francis I. of France, 292, 307, 308,
3°9-
Franciscan Friars, 214, 215.
Frankfort, 321 ; Council of, 63.
Frederick of Suabia, 185.
Frederick Prince of Wales, son of
George II., 382.
Free Education Bill, 423.
French, Elizabeth, niece of Crom-
well, 362.
Fressingfield, 355, 359, 360.
Freteval, 172.
Frithegode, 87, 88.
Frithonas (see Deusdedit), 32.
Frome, 95.
Fulham, 330, 348, 411, 412, 413,
433-
Galloway, 334.
Gardiner, Secretary of State and
Bishop of Winchester, 296, 300,
301, 312.
Garter, Order of the, 240.
Gaskell, Mrs. 406.
Gaveston, Piers, 222.
Geddes, Jenny, 343.
Gelasius II., Pope, 152.
Geoffrey, half brother to Richard I.,
Archbishop of York, 186.
Geoffrey Fitz Peter, 189.
George, Bishop of Ostria, 60.
George I., 367.
George II., 373-384-
George III. 384-393-
George IV. 393"395-
George V., 446-448.
Gerard, Cardinal, 218.
Gerunt, Prince of Cornwall, 45.
Gervase of Canterbury, 183.
Gibson, Dr., Bishop of London, 371,
373.
Gilbert, Earl of Clare, 199.
Giraldus Cambrensis, 182 ; dispute
with Archbishop Hubert Walter,
190.
Gladstone, Mr. 413, 418, 425, 430,
433-
Glasgow, 334, 408, 434.
Glastonbury, 43, 89, 92, 93, 94, 95,
99, 101, 104, 114, 116.
Glendower, Owen, rebellion of, 287.
Gloucester, 142, 155, 286, 340,
35L 389-
Gloucester, Duke of, uncle to
Richard II., 255, 256.
Godfrey, Duke of Louvain, 153.
Godwin, Archbishop of Lyons, 43.
Godwine, Earl of Wessex, 119, 120,
121, 122, 125.
Good Friday observance, 228.
Good Parliament, 251.
Gordon, General 432.
Gorham, Rev. George Cornelius,
401.
Goulburn, Dr., 428.
Gowrie, Conspiracy, 334.
Graham, Richard, Viscount Pres-
ton, 369.
Grandison, John, Bishop of Exeter,
dispute with Archbishop, 229.
Grateley, 83.
459
Index
Great Houghton, 402.
Green, Rev. S. R, 439.
Green's Norton, 373.
Greenwich, 112, 277, 296, 312.
Gregory, Anti-pope, 156.
Gregory the Great, Pope election,
9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 21, 28,
53, 86, 318.
Gregory II., Pope, 49.
Gregory III., Pope, 47, 50, 52.
Gregory VII., Pope (Hildebrand),
136, 146.
Gregory IX., Pope, 198, 202, 206.
Gregory X., Pope, 211, 212.
Gregory XI., Pope, 243, 248, 251.
Gregory XII., Pope, 264.
Grey, Lady Jane, 301, 302, 315.
Griffith, Sir William, 287.
Grimbald, 78.
Grim, Edward, defender of a
Becket, 175.
Grimkytell, 124.
Grimsby, Great, 324.
Grimstone, Sir Harbottle, 344.
Grindal, Edmund, 320-323.
Guildford, 333, 337, 338.
Guisnes, 260.
Gundulf , Bishop of Rochester, 1 50.
Gundulf, father of Anselm, 139.
Gunpowder Plot, 331.
Guthrum the Dane, 76.
Gynwell, Bishop of Lincoln, ab-
solved from obedience to Arch-
bishop of Canterbury by Pope,
239-
Habam, council of, 114.
Hackington, 182, 184, 259, 294.
Hackney, 255, 351.
Hadrian, abbot, 36, 37, 38, 41, 56.
Hadrian I., Pope, 60, 61.
Hadrian II., Pope, 75.
Halifax, Lord, 441.
Hallam, Robert, Bishop of Salis-
bury, 264.
Hailing, 180.
Halstow, 191.
Hampden, 344.
Hampden, Dr., Bishop of Here-
ford, 398.
Hampton Court Conference, 327,
328, 331, 334.
Hanbald, father of Lanfranc, 130.
Harlestone, Margaret, wife of Arch-
bishop Parker, 315.
Harold I., 116, 118, 119.
Harold II., 124, 126, 127.
Harrow, 208, 404, 405, 437.
Harthacnut, 117, 119.
Harviestoun, 408.
Hastings, 143, 245, 277; battle of,
127.
Hatfield, Herts, council of, 40.
Hatfield, Yorks, battle of, 29.
Hautecombe, 210.
Hawarden, 425.
Haworth, 406.
Haymo Heath, Bishop of Roches-
ter, 228, 232.
Heath, Archbishop, 312.
Heathen temples, 22.
Hedda, Bishop, 46.
Heming, in.
Henry, Bishop of Winchester, 159,
160, 168.
Henry Burghersh, Bishop of Lin-
coln, 238.
Henry Langton, father of Stephen,
192.
Henry of Eastry, 226.
Henry of Lancaster, 232 ; ditto,
- cousin of Richard II., 254.
Henry I., 139, 145, 149, 150, 151,
^s, *53» *55 '• reconciled with
Anselm, 146.
Henry II., 159, 163-184.
Henry, son of Henry II., 177, 178,
180 ; coronation of, 173.
Henry III., 192, 196, 199, 204-209;
foreign favourites, 203.
Henry IV., 257, 258, 261.
Henry V., 264, 265, 272.
Henry VI., 265-278, 281, 282.
Henry VII., 147, 279, 284, 290.
Henry VIII., 286, 291-309 315 ;
divorce, 293, 296, 306 ; excom-
municated, 309.
Henry II., of France, 311.
Henry, son of James I., 335.
Herbert of Boseham, 173.
Hereford, 50, 52, 179, 348.
Hereford, Earl of, revolt, 221.
Heretics (see also Lollards), burn-
ing of, 258.
Herewald, Bishop of Sherborne, 50.
Hereward, 128, 369.
Herluin, founder of Bee, 131-133,
140.
Herring, Thomas, 376-378.
Hertford, council of, 38, 39.
Hewald, 45.
Hexham, 45.
Higbert, 61, 63, 64.
Higham, 59.
460
Index
Higham Ferrars, 263, 266.
High Commission Court, 341, 342 ;
re-established, 357.
High Church Party, 393, 401.
Hilda, Abbess of Whitby, 33.
Hildebrand, 130, 136.
Hingwar, the Dane, 84.
Hlotheri, King of Kent, 43.
Hoadley, Dr., Bishop of Bangor,
37i-
Hodgkins, suffragan Bishop of
Bedford, 316.
Hoerstan, father of Dunstan, 81, 90.
Holborn, 259, 283, 285.
Holy Isle, 30.
Holy Trinity, Bordesley, 415.
Holywell, 365.
Honorius, 28-31.
Honorius I., Pope, 28.
Honorius II., Pope, 157.
Honorius III., Pope, 196.
Hooker, Bishop, 327.
Horncastle, 238.
Hough, John, 357.
Houghton-le-Spring, 356, 382.
Howard, Lady Caroline Georgiana,
432.
Howley, William, 395-399, 423.
Hrotwari, Abbess, 51.
Hubert de Burgh, Justiciar, 197,
199.
Huddleston, John, 356.
Hugh, Abbot of St. Augustine's, 158.
Hugh, Count of Paris, 82.
Hugh, Earl of Chester, 141.
Hugh le Despenser, 224, 427.
Hugo, Cardinal of Tudela, horse-
play of, 236.
Huntingdon, 245.
Huntingdon, Countess of, 387.
Hurd, Bishop, 384, 389.
Hutton, Matthew, 379-380.
Hyde, 351.
Hythe, 387.
Icherius of Concoreto, canon of
Salisbury, 229.
Ickford, 351.
Images removed from churches,
300.
Immaculate Conception, festival of,
228.
Ina, King of Wessex, 43, 46, 93.
Infant Life Protection Act, 443.
Ingram, Dr. Winnington, Bishop
of London, 435.
Ingwald, Bishop of London, 47.
Innocent II., Pope, 160,
Innocent III., Pope, 189, 192, 193,
196.
Innocent IV., Pope, 205-207.
Innocent VI., Pope, 247.
Innocent VII., Pope, 264.
Innocent XL, Pope, 357.
Interdict, England under, 194 ;
London under, 225 ; Leicester
under, 253.
Investiture, 136, 146, 147, 149, 152.
Iona, monastery of, 30.
Ionian Islands, 427.
Irish Church, Disestablishment of,
413. 433-
Irmingburga, Queen of Northum-
bria, 40.
Isabella, wife of Edward II., 225,
227, 232.
Isabella, Wife of John, 189.
Ithamar, first English Bishop, 31,
32.
Jackson, Dr., Bishop of London,
433-
Jaenbert (or Lambert), 57, 59-62.
James, deacon, 29.
James I., 328-337.
James II., 356-359, 366, 368, 369.
James IV. of Scotland, 288.
Jansenists, 370.
Jane Seymour, 298.
Jarrow, 42.
Jefferys, Chancellor, 358.
Jenkins, Rev. Claude, 280.
Jeremias, 158, 160, 162.
Jerusalem, Bishopric of, 397.
Jesuits and Jansenists, 370.
Jews, Naturalisation of, 383.
Joanna, daughter of Henry II., 179.
John, Abbot, 40.
John, Archbishop of Aries, 37.
John, Dean of Canterbury, 150, 152.
John de Grey, Bishop of Norwich,
192.
John de Stratford, 225, 231-234,
238.
John Frederick, Duke of Saxony,
297.
John of Crema, Cardinal, 156.
John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster,
247, 248, 252.
John of Salisbury, 161.
John of Ufford, Dean of Lincoln,
235.
John, King, 184, 186-196 ; con-
spiracy against Richard, 188 ;
461
Index
quarrel with Pope, 193-194 ;
submission, 194, 215.
John X., Pope, 81, 82.
John XII., Pope, 96.
John XV., Pope, 103.
John XVIII., Pope, no.
John XXII., Pope, 224, 227, 229,
232.
Joseph of Arimathaea, 89.
Jowett, Professor, 412.
Julius, II., Pope, 291.
Julius III., Pope, 310, 312.
Jumidges, 121, 123.
Justices of the Peace, 188.
Justification by Faith, 309, 310.
Justus, first Bishop of Rochester,
14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23, 25-27.
Juxon, William, 347-350.
Keble, 396.
Keddington, 362.
Kemp, John, Archbishop of York,
266, 269, 272-275.
Ken, Bishop of Bath and Wells,
357-
Kenilworth, 400.
Kenulf, King of Mercia, 63-69.
Kenwyn, 420.
Kett, rebellion of, 315.
Kildare, 425.
Kilwardby, Robert, 211-213.
Kimmerghane, Berwickshire, 437.
Kineberht, Bishop of Winchester,
65.
King, Dr. Edward, Bishop of
Lincoln, 422.
King, Rev. Bryan, 411.
Kingston, 79, 81, 82; Council of,
73-
Kirkby Overblow, 260.
Knaresborough Forest, 273.
Kneller Hall, 428.
Knights Templars, suppression of,
222.
Knole, 279, 285.
Kynsey, Archbishop of York, 126.
Ladies' Diocesan Association, 412.
Lake, Bishop of Chichester, 357.
Lambert, monk, 58.
Lambert (or Jaenbert), 59-62.
Lambeth, 184, 190, 207, 213, 236,
246, 248, 249, 262, 266, 274, 280,
288, 302, 313, 316, 318, 321,
332, 343> 350, 353, 357. 363, 367,
368, 371, 375, 378, 385, 388, 391,
394, 398, 416, 422, 423, 433, 435,
437. 438, 439-
" Lambeth Articles," 327.
Lanfranc, 88, 113, 130-138, 140 ;
reforms of, 135.
Langham, Simon, 242-244, 247 ;
appointed cardinal, 243.
Langton, Simon, 197.
Langton, Stephen, 192-197 ; exile
and return, 194 ; suspension by
Pope, 196.
Langton, Thomas, 288.
Lansdowne, Lord, 444.
Lateran Council, fourth, 196.
Latimer, Bishop, 302.
Latimer, William, 306.
Latitudinarians, 363, 368, 380.
Laud, William, 334, 336, 337, 339-
346, 347, 348 ; trial and execu-
tion, 345.
Laurentius, 17-20.
Le Breton, Richard, 174.
Lee, Dr. Prince, Bishop of Man-
chester, 418, 419.
Leeds, 405.
Legate, Bartholomew, burned for
heresy, 335.
Legatine authority and bishops,
157, 159, 160, 162, 188, 196, 265.
Leicester, Earl of, 318, 326.
Leicester, placed under interdict,
253-
Leighton, Dr. Alexander, 341.
Lenten fast, 31.
Leo III., Pope, 64, 65, 67, 68.
Leo IX., Pope, 123.
Leo XIII., Pope, 424, 435.
Leofa, slayer of King Edmund, 94.
Leofric, Abbot, 106.
Lewes, 214.
Lewknor, Sir Thomas, 272.
Leyden, 335, 381, 382.
Leyton, 255.
" Libellus Famosus," 233.
Licensing Bill, 443, 444.
Lichfield, 60, 65, 238, 245, 263,
277, 335, 386.
Liege, 308.
Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, 418, 439.
Limanee, 48.
Linacre, Thomas, 306.
Lincoln, 28, 31, 179, 198, 204, 205,
218, 231, 236, 238, 243, 245, 260,
263, 277, 281, 315, 366, 370, 386,
420, 428 ; battle of, 161.
Lincoln judgment, 422, 441.
Lincoln's Inn, 207, 362, 376.
462
Index
Lindisfarne, 30.
Lionel, son of Edward L, 234, 238.
Little Compton, 349.
Liturgy, proposed revision of, 402.
Llandaff, 75, 227, 400.
Llanthony, 286.
Llewellyn, of Wales, 212, 216.
Lloyd, Bishop of St. Asaph, 357.
Lollards, 253, 258, 259.
" Lollards' Tower," Lambeth, 266.
London, see of, 14, 19, 22, 61, 121,
122, 207, 242, 247, 260, 272, 321,
341, 348, 352, 410, 430, 433;
Bishop's Fund, 412.
London, councils of, 68, 134, 147,
159, 163, 279.
London, 121, 207, 311 ; seized by
Danes, 73 ; attack on, 109; Tyler's
insurrection, 249-250.
Long Parliament, 343.
Longley, Charles Thomas, 404-407,
430.
Lord Chancellor, first use of title,
269.
Lothair Conti, afterwards Innocent
HI., 193.
Lothair, King of Kent, 36.
Louis d'Outremer, 85.
Louis VII. of France, 171, 178.
Louis XI. of France, 282.
Lowth, Robert, Bishop of London,
389-
Lucius II., Pope, 162.
Luidhard, 10, 11.
Lullus, 54, 56.
Luther, Martin, works burnt in
London, 292.
Lutterworth, 252.
Lyminge, 29, 52.
Lynn, 228, 258.
Lyons, 205, 207, 212.
Lyving (or Elstan), 114-115.
Mackonochie, Rev. A. H., 415, 439.
Maclagan, Dr., 435.
Mad Parliament, 209.
Magna Charta, 195 ; declared null
and void by Pope, 196 ; con-
firmed, 197, 209.
Maidstone, 210, 225, 249, 254, 271,
387.
Maldon, battle, of, 103.
Mailing, 73.
Manchester, 418.
Manners-Sutton, Charles, 392-394.
Mant, Richard, 393.
Mantua, 297.
Maple Durham, 400.
Marcke, 260.
Margaret, Countess of Salisbury,
306, 308, 309.
Margaret, daughter of Henry VII.,
288.
Margaret of Anjou, Queen of Henry
VI., 269, 270, 272, 278, 282.
Margaret, St., Queen of Scotland,
138.
Marlborough, Duke of, 374 ;
duchess of, 384 ; second duke,
389.
Marriage, 88 ; of clergy, 147, 299,
300, 318 (see also Benedictines
and secular clergy).
Marske, 379.
Martin, Francis, 419.
" Martin Marprelate " tracts, 327.
Martin V., Pope, 265, 273.
Martyr, Peter, 321.
Mary I., Queen, 295, 298, 301, 306,
307, 310-313, 315, 321.
Mary II., see William III., 366.
Mary, Queen of Scots, 317.
Massacre, of St. Brice's day, 108 ;
of St. Bartholomew, 317.
Masses for the dead, 442.
Matilda, daughter of Henry I., 157,
160, 161.
Matilda, wife of William I. , 132, 133.
Mattishall, 319.
Maurilius, Archbishop of Rouen,
140.
Maxwell, usher, 344.
Mayfield, 230, 234, 240, 241.
Maynard, 344.
" Meditations " of Anselm, 148.
Melbourne, Lord, 405.
Mellitus, 14, 16, 18-24.
Melton, William, Archbishop of
York, 225.
Melville, Andrew, 331.
Mendicant orders, 270.
Mentz, 54.
Meopham or Mepeham, Simon, 227-
230 ; excommunication of, by
pope, 230.
Merton Abbey, 158.
Merton College Oxford, 227, 231 ,
236, 237, 238.
Merton Priory, 165.
Metford, Richard, Bishop of Salis-
bury, 263.
Methodist movement, 374, 383.
Milbourne St. Andrew, 281.
Mile End, 249.
463
Index
Miles Platting, 439.
Miller, Rev. Jeremiah, 374.
Milman, Dean, 411.
Miracles, 15, 216, 222 ; of Odo, 85,
86 ; of Dunstan, 98 ; Becket,
175 ; St, Edmund, 205.
Missionary College of St. Augustine.
13-
Monasteries, 182, 284 ; dissolution
of, 299.
Monins, Alice, 314.
Monmouth, Duke of, 366.
Montacute, Lord, 232.
Montague, Lord, 308, 309.
Moore, John, 389-391.
Morcar, Earl, 127.
More, Sir Thomas, 285, 291, 298,
306.
Morrone, Peter, 218.
Mortimer, Lord, 227, 232.
Mortlake, 225.
Mortmain, Statute of, 215.
Morton, Betty, 408.
Morton, John, 281-285 ; cardinal,
284.
Morton's Leame, 285.
Much Hadham, 262.
Murder of Edward the Martyr, 99 ;
of Thomas a Becket, 175 ; of
Edward II., 225 ; of Bishop
Stapleton, 228 ; of Simon Sud-
bury, 250.
Narni, 200.
Natendon, Proctor of St. Augus-
tines, 229.
National Covenant, 343.
National Society, 393, 398.
Nazareth, 187.
Nestorian, 423.
Neville, Alexander, Archbishop of
York, 256.
Newington, 351.
Newman, 396, 409.
New Minster, Winchester, 80, 101.
Nice, 309.
Nicholas, Bishop of Tusculum,
legate, 195.
Nicholas II., Pope, 133.
Nicholas III., Pope, 213, 214, 215.
Nicholas IV., Pope, 218.
Nicholas V., Pope, 274.
Nonconformity, 318, 321, 322, 326,
335, 34i, 352, 353, 357, 363, 372,
383, 393, 415-
Non-jurors, 359, 371.
Norfolk, Duke of, 261.
Norfolk, Earl of, revolt, 221.
Norreys, Roger, 184.
Normandy, William II., expedition
to, 143 ; loss of, 190.
Northampton, 263 ; battle of, 278.
Northampton Castle, council at,
170.
North Berwick, 413.
North Bradley, 268.
Northumberland, Earl of, 301, 315.
Northumbrians, conversion of, 26.
Norwich, 264, 314, 319, 365, 366,
392.
Nothelm, 49-51.
Nottingham, 195.
Nuys, 282.
Oakley (or Acle), 67.
Odbert, Abbot, 102.
Odiham, 264.
Odo, 84-88, 96.
Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, 137.
Offa, King of Mercia, 47, 59, 60, 61,
63, 65.
Olaf of Norway, 109, no.
Oldcastle, Sir John, condemned for
heresy, 258, 272 ; burned, 259.
Onestrefield, 44.
Orange Prince of (afterwards King
of Holland), 395.
Orders, Anglican and the Pope,
424, 435-
Ormonde, Marquesses of, 191.
Osbern, 56.
Osbern, biographer of St. Elphege,
"3-
Osiander of Nuremberg, 297.
Osney, 212; synod of, 196.
Osred, King of Northumbria, 43,
44, 45-
Oswald, Archbishop of York, 86, 97.
Oswald, King of Northumbria, 29,
30-
Oswy, King of Northumbria, 32, 36.
Otford, 222, 243, 245, 246, 288.
Otho, sub-deacon of Roman Church,
196, 203.
Otto I., of Germany, 92.
Outlawry of clergy, 219.
Oxford, 161, 201, 202, 209, 211, 212,
214, 218, 227, 231, 236, 240, 245,
248, 252, 255, 263, 269, 272,
275, 277, 281, 285, 286, 290, 293,
302, 306, 312, 323, 332, 339, 34i,
346, 347, 35o, 352, 353, 357, 369,
373, 374, 382, 383, 389, 390, 391,
464
Index
395, 402, 404, 428, 437 ; All
Soul's College founded, 266.
Oxford Movement, 396, 397.
Padua, 306, 307, 310.
Paget, Dr. Francis, 445.
Pains and Penalties Bill, 395.
Palmerston, Lord, 406, 410.
Pan- Anglican Congress, 407, 445.
Pandulf, Papal Legate, 194.
Papacy, Night of, 82.
Papal authority in England, 148,
151, 163, 190, 199, 203, 204, 213,
215, 224, 239, 240, 261, 265, 266,
288, 293, 294, 297, 307, 311,
407, 435 ; supremacy denied by
Henry VIII., 299.
Paris, 180, 193, 201, 202, 209, 211,
214, 218, 247, 307, 381.
Parnell, Sir Henry Brooke, 405.
Parochial system, 42.
Parker, Matthew, 314-319, 321 ;
denounced for heresy, 315.
Parliament, submission to pope,
312.
Parry, Dr., Bishop of Dover, 414,
438.
Pascal II., Pope, 146, 151.
Paton, Dr., 434.
Paul, Abbot of St. Albans, 130.
Paul I., Pope, 56, 59.
Paul III., Pope, 308, 309, 310.
Paul IV., Pope, 303, 312.
Paulinus, 21, 26, 28, 29.
Pavia, 116, 130.
Peada, 33.
Peche, Richard, Bishop of Lich-
field, 164.
Peckham, John, 214-217.
Peckwater Inn, Oxford, 281.
Pecock, Reginald, Bishop of St.
Asaph, and Chichester, 270,
recantation of errors, 280.
Pelagius II., Pope, 10.
Pembroke, Earl of, 203.
Penance of Henry II. at Becket's
tomb, 175.
Penda, King of Mercia, 29, 30.
Penitanham, 44.
"Penitential" of Theodore, 42.
Penry (" Martin Marprelate "), 327.
Penryn, 427.
Pentateuch, date of, 406.
Percy, Lord, Earl Marshall, 252.
Percy, Hugh, Lord, 260.
Perne, Dr., 324.
Perth, 434.
Peterborough, 33, 285, 392.
Peter, Cardinal, Bishop of Pales-
trina, 228.
Peter de Rievaulx, 203.
Peter de Roches, 203.
Peterhouse, Cambridge, 245, 246,
324-
Peter of Savoy, 210.
Peter's Pence, 117, 136.
Petition of Rights, 337.
Petworth, 379.
Philip, brother of Boniface of
Savoy, 207.
Philip of France, 184, 194, 222.
Philip of Spain, 302, 310, 312, 313.
Philpotts, Dr., Bishop of Exeter,
401, 403.
Pilgrims to the shrine of St.
Thomas, 247.
Pipewell, council at, 186.
Pisa, council of, 264.
Pitt, 392, 393.
Pius V., Pope, 317.
Plague of London, 353, 365.
Plantagenet, Henry, 3rd Earl of
Lancaster, 255.
Plegmund, 78-80.
Plegmundham, or Plemstol, 78.
Pluralities, forbidden, 204, 215,
242, 260, 332, 396; limited, 224.
Pole, Cardinal, 302, 306-313 325,
425 ; denunciation of Henry
VIII., 308.
Poll-tax, 249.
Ponthieu, 232.
Pontigny, Becketat, 172 ; Langton
at, 194 ; Edmund Rich at, 205.
Poole, Rev. Alfred, licence with-
drawn, 411.
Poor Laws, 403.
Porchester, 194, 260.
Porteous, Bishop, 384.
Potter, John, 373-375-
Poynings, Sir Edward, 286 ; Poyn-
ings' Act, 287.
Praemunire, Statute of, 240, 265,
266, 293.
Prayer Book, 300, 301, 302, 310,
317, 342. 352, 363, 401, 414-
Predestination, 327, 341, 355.
Presbyterians, 327, 330, 348, 409.
Prison Reform, 443.
Priests, marriage of, 299.
Privilege of Withred, 44, 53.
Probus, near Truro, 427.
Prophesyings, 322.
465
Index
Prophete, John, Keeper of Privy
Seal, 262.
Protestant League, 297.
Protestants, persecution of, 302.
Provisors, Statute of, 240, 265, 266.
Prynne, 341, 344.
Public Worship Regulation Act,
414.
Pulton, Andrew, 366.
Puritanism, 320, 322, 325, 326,
327, 33o, 33i, 335, 34i, 345, 346,
353-
Pusey, 396, 430.
Pyncheon, William, 263.
Ralph d'Escures, 149-154.
Ramsbury, 85, 103, 105.
Ramsgate, 387.
Ransom of Richard I., 187.
Ranulf, Chancellor to Henry I., 155.
Ranulf de Glanville, 183-186.
Reading, council at, 215, 339.
Rebellion in Devon and Cornwall,
301, 310.
Rebellion of 1745, 377.
Reculver, 13, 43, 68, 69.
Redwald, King of East Anglia, 26.
Reformation, 290, 291, 297, 324.
Reform Bill, 396.
Regina, Canada, 445.
Reginald de Asser, Bishop of
Winchester, 231.
Reginald Fitz-Jocelin, 178, 187.
Reginald, Sub-prior of Canterbury,
192.
Register, Peckham's, 217, 227.
Religious Tract Society, 391.
Remigius, Bishop of Lincoln, 134.
Repton, 436.
Rettenden, 376.
Reynolds, Walter, 223-226, 231.
Rheims, council at, 152, 162.
Rhyl, 423.
Rich, Mabel, 201.
Rich, Reinhard, 201.
Rich, Lord, marriage of divorced
wife of, 340.
Richard, 177-180 ; dispute with
Roger of York, 179 ; with Roger
of St. Augustine's, 179.
Richard I., 184-189.
Richard II., 247-261.
Richard III., 279, 282, 283.
Richard de Belmeis, Bishop of
London, 155.
Richard de Gravesend, Bishop of
London, 218.
Richard de la Wych, 204.
Richard Marshall, Earl of Pem-
broke, 203.
Ridley, Bishop, 302, 320, 324.
Riley, Athelstan, 423.
Ripon, 86, 87, 379, 404.
Ritualism, 411, 414, 415, 439, 442.
Robert or Champart, 121-123, 125.
Robert, Abbot of Bee, 177.
Robert, Bishop of London, 185.
Robert Burnell, 211, 214.
Robert de Baldeck, 231.
Robert de Belleme, Earl of Shrews-
bury, 150.
Robert de Hales, 249.
Robert de Stratford, Bishop of
Chichester, 232, 233.
Robert de Stretton, 239.
Robert Grosseteste, 204, 206, 207.
Robert, son of the Conqueror, 133,
142, 146.
Robertson, George, 400.
Robert I. of Paris, 82.
Rochdale, 319.
Rochester, 14, 25, 126, 180, 184,
190, 191, 193, 199, 204, 207, 228,
245, 253, 273, 288, 311, 376, 404,
441.
Rochester Castle, 158.
Rockingham Castle, council at, 143.
Roger, Abbot-elect of St. Augus-
tine's, 179.
Roger, Archbishop of York, 173,
174, 179. 180.
Roger Pont l'Eveque, Archdeacon,
166.
Rogers, John, 298.
Romanus, Bishop of Rochester, 26.
Rome, union of English church
with, 135, 148, 151, 157.
Rome, council at, 146.
Rome, pilgrimages to, 46.
Romney, 387.
Ropley, 395.
Rose, Rev. Hugh James, 396.
Roses, Wars of the, 277-279.
Rotterdam, 291.
Rouen, 133, 140, 141, 152, 160.
Royal Supremacy, 326.
Rufinianus, Abbot, 21.
Rugby, 409, 414, 419, 428, 429,
43i-
Runnymede, 195.
Russell, Lord William, 363.
Russell, Lord John, 401, 410.
Russell, Sir John, 325.
Russell, Thomas, 398.
466
Index
Rutland, Duke of, 392.
Rye House Plot, 362.
Rygge. Dr., supporter of Wyclif,
253-
Ryton, 382.
Sabert, King of Essex, 14, 19.
Sacrament, Cranmer's declaration
on, 304.
Saffron Walden, 260.
St. Agatha's, Landport, 442.
St. Albans, 105, 106, 208 ; battle
of, 278.
St. Alban's, Holborn, 415.
St. Andrew, Rome, 9, 10.
St. Andrew's, Holborn, 260, 330.
St. Andrew's, Rochester, 25.
St. Andrews, Scotland, 193, 257.
441-
St. Anselm (see also Anselm of
Bee), 183.
St. Asaph, 404.
St. Augustine of Hippo, relic of,
116.
St. Augustine's Monastery, 13, 23,
54, 120, 135, 179, 180, 193, 222,
229 ; disputes as to burial of
archbishops, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 62.
St. Austin, 286.
St. Bartholomew, 208 ; massacre,
317-
St. Bartholomew, Smithfield, 262.
St. Bees, 320, 323.
St. Benet's Chapel, Westminster,
244.
St. Blaise, relics brought to Can-
terbury, 80.
St. Bonaventure, 212.
St. Briavel's Castle, 286.
St. Cuthbert, 155. ,
St. Cyriacus, 278.
St. David's, 75, 190, 263, 340.
St. Dominic, 211.
St. Dunstan's in the West, 281.
St. Gemini, 200.
St. George's in the East, disturb-
ances at, 411, 412.
St. Giles, Edinburgh, 343.
St. Gluvias, Cornwall, 427.
St. Heliers, Jersey, 260.
St. James's, Piccadilly, 370, 382.
St. John's, Colchester, 263.
St. John's'College, 334, 340, 347.
St. Jumieges, 121.
St. Just, 401.
St. Laurence Jewry, 363.
St. Mark's, Kermington, 438.
St. Martin, Canterbury, 12, 119.
St. Martin, Dover, 158, 177.
St. Martin's le Grand, London, 277.
St. Martin's, London, 269, 366.
St. Mary-at-Bow, 189.
St. Mary-le-Bow, 231, 363, 380.
St. Michael's Chapel, Canterbury,
197.
St. Mihiel in Bar, 282.
St. Ninian's Cathedral, Perth, 434.
St. Osyth, 155.
St. Patrick the younger, 90.
St. Paul's Cross, 251.
St. Paul's, Kensington, 411.
St. Paul's, London, 22, 50, 195,
203, 207, 218, 224, 236, 238, 265,
278, 281, 284, 320, 330, 350, 362,
363, 386 ; struck by lightning,
321 ; rebuilding, 353, 356.
St. Peter's, Westminster, 242.
St. Saviour's, Leeds, 405.
St. Peter and St. Paul, Canterbury,
13, 16, 18, 20, 24.
St. Stephen's, Caen, 130.
St. Stephen's, Canterbury, 182.
St. Stephen's, Walbrook, 263.
St. Stephen's, Westminster, 242.
St. Thomas Aquinas, 212, 214.
St. Thomas of Canterbury (see also
Thomas a Becket), 176, 178, 183,
247, 248, 261, 266.
Saints Days, observance of, 53, 54,
239-
Saladin, 157.
Salisbury, 85, 186, 202, 205, 247,
260, 263, 269, 281, 285, 306, 402,
412 ; bishop of, excommunicated,
253-
Salisbury, Lord, 427, 433, 441.
Saltwood Castle, 261.
Sancroft, William, 318, 355-360.
Sanctuary, right of, 189.
Sandwich, in, 171, 173, 274, 387.
Sandys, Edwin, 320.
Santa Balbina, 274.
Santa Rufina, 274.
Sautre, William, burned, 258.
Savoy Conference, 350, 352.
Savoy Street, 210.
Sawbridge, 223.
Saxon Chronicle, 72, 78 (and
references).
Schism, the great, 221, 265.
School, St. Augustine's, 41.
Scory, Bishop of Hereford, 316.
Scotland as fief of Roman see, 220,
467
Index
Scotland, Free Church of, 399.
Scott, Colonel, the Regicide, 318.
Screveton, 392.
Scrope, Richard, Chancellor, 249.
Scutage, 167, 199.
Secessions to Rome, 397, 406.
Seeker, Thomas, 381-385.
Secular clergy (see also Bene-
dictines), 53, 72,75, 98, ioi, 104,
106, 134, 158, 182, 183, 315, 331.
Seez, 149.
Seffrid, Bishop of Chichester, 152.
Seffrid of Escures, 149.
Selsey, 61, 101, 124, 126.
Senlis, 10.
Sens, 171. 172.
Sergius I., Pope, 43, 45, 46.
Sergius III., Pope, 80.
Shaftesbury, 118.
Sheen, 306.
Sheldford, 69.
Sheldon, Gilbert, 285, 332, 350,
351-354-
Sheldonian Theatre, 353-354.
Shelford, 376.
Shelstone, 352.
Shelton, 381.
Sherborne, 46, 61.
Shop Assistants, Seats for, 443.
Short, Thomas Vowler, Bishop of
St. Asaph, 404.
Shrewsbury, Robert de Belleme,
Earl of, 150.
Shrine of Dunstan, 100 ; of Becket,
176, 271 ; destruction of, 299.
Sibthorpe, 381.
Sibthorpe, Dr., 337.
Sidgwick, Mary, 419.
Sidgwick, Rev. William, 419.
Siena, 264.
Sigebert, King of East Anglia, 30.
Sigeric (or Siric), 103-104.
Sigfrid, Bishop of Selsey, 48.
Silvester, Abbot of St. Augustine's,
162.
Simon de Burcheston, 242.
Simon de Montefort, 204.
Simon Islip, 238-241, 245.
Singing in English churches, 29.
Sisterhoods, Anglican, 412, 423.
Sittingbourne, 387.
Siward, Bishop of Ijpsala, 120.
Six Articles, Act of, 299, 300.
Skerries, The, 287.
Skipton, 419.
Slindon, Sussex, 197, 229.
Sluys, 282.
Smith, Dr. Miles, Bishop of
Gloucester, 340.
Smithfield, 312, 335.
Society for the Propagation of the
Gospel, 367. 380. 391.
Soissy, 205.
Somerset, Duke of, Protector, 300,
301, 310.
Somerton, 347.
Sorbonne, 370.
Southampton, 109, 398.
South Minster, 68, 69.
Southwell, 275.
Sowerby, 361.
Spearhafoc, Abbot of Abingdon,
122.
Spenser, Edmund, 323,
Spooner, Archdeacon, 409.
Spooner Catherine, 409.
Spofforth, 379.
Sports, Book of, 335.
Stafford, John, 268-271.
Stafford, Sir Humphrey, 268.
Stanley, abbey of, 202.
Stanley, Dean, 430,
Stanton, 351.
Stapleton, Bishop of Exeter,
murder of, 228.
Stapleton Hall, Oxford, 251.
Star Chamber, 322, 341.
Stebenhyth, 255.
Stephen, King, 155, 157, 159, 160.
163, 164.
Stephen of Lexington, 202.
Stephen VI., Pope, 80.
Stigand, last Anglo-Saxon arch-
bishop, 124-129 ; deposition,
128 ; wealth of, 129.
Stoke-by-Clare, 314.
Stourton, Castle, 306.
Stow, 238.
Stow-cum-Qui, 376.
Strafford, Earl of, 341, 342, 343,
344. 348.
Stratford, John, Bishop of Winches-
ter, 225 (see also John de Strat-
ford).
Stratford-on-Avon, 231, 234.
Sudbury, 250.
Sudbury, Simon, 247-250, 251.
Suffolk, Duke of, murdered, 270,
274.
Sumner, John Bird, 398, 400-403.
Sunday, observance of, 239.
Sunday Schools, 391.
Supremacy, Act of, 316.
Surplice, use of, 317.
468
Index
Sutcliffe, Dr., Dean of Exeter, 332.
Sweyn, King of Denmark, 108, 109 ;
King of England, 114.
Swift, Dean, on Archbishop Her-
ring, 378-
Swinton, John, 437.
Swithin, St., Bishop of Winchester,
74-
Synod of Clovesho, 53.
Tait, Archibald Campbell, 408-417,
423, 430, 437, 438.
Tait, Rev. Craufurd, 415, 437.
Tait, Miss Edith Murdoch, 438.
Talbot, William, Bishop of Oxford,
381, 382.
Tamworth, Danish victory at, 94.
Tarbes, bishop of, 293.
Tarsus, 36.
Tatwin, 47-48.
Taunton, 255.
Taxes on clergy, 219, 246, 259, 292.
Temperance, 383, 432, 434, 435,
443-
Temple, Frederick, 412, 419, 427-
436, 442.
Temple, Frederick Charles, 436.
Temple, Major Octavius, 427.
Temple, Rev. W. J., 427.
Temple, William, 436.
Tenham, 191.
Tenison, Thomas, 365-368, 374.
Teversham, 325, 330.
Tewkesbury, 108 ; battle of, 282.
Thanet, 12, 33, 73.
Theobald, 159-164, 177.
Theobald of Blois, 185.
Theodore, 36-42, 56.
Theologild (see Feologeld).
Theophylact, Bishop of Todi, 60.
Thietmar, Archbishop of Merse-
burg, 113.
Thirlby, Bishop of Ely, 303.
Thomas, Archbishop of York, 133.
Thomas a Becket, 100, 161, 164,
165-176 ; impeachment and
flight, 171 ; return from exile,
173 ; martyrdom and canoniza-
tion, 175.
Thomas Cobham, Archdeacon of
Lewes, 223.
Thomas of Brentingham, Bishop of
Exeter, 253.
Thomas of Elmham, 21, 25, 42, 51,
53-
Thomas of Savoy, 206 ; ditto,
brother of Boniface, 209.
Thomas of Woodstock, 253.
Thornden, Bishop of Dover, 302.
Thorold, Dr., 441, 442.
Thoroton, Thomas, 392.
Throne, theory of election to, 189.
Thrum, 113.
Thurkill, Earl, in, 112, 113.
Thurstan, Archbishop of York, 151,
152, 155, 156, 157.
Tillotson, John, 361-364.
Tithe Act, 423.
Tithes, 73, 83, 243,
Tiverton, 428.
Tobias, Bishop of Rochester, 44.
Todi, 200.
--Toleration Act, 359.
Tomb of Dunstan, opened, 100.
Tomline, Bishop of Lincoln, 392.
Tonbridge, 199.
Toronto, 444.
Tottenham, 235.
Toulouse, expedition to, 167.
Tournay, battle of, 233.
Tours, 65.
Towton, battle of, 281.
Tracts for the Times, 409, 428.
Transubstantiation, 258, 299, 320 ;
defended by Lanfranc, 132.
Travers, Presbyterian leader, 327.
Trelawney, Bishop of Bristol, 357.
Trent, Council of, 309.
Trial of Pope Formosus after death,
80.
Trial of Seven Bishops, 358.
Tribute paid to Danes, 103.
Tribute to Popes refused, 193.
Trinity College, Cambridge, 299.
Trinity, feast of, 168.
Trowbridge, 379.
Truro, 418, 420, 421, 431.
Tuda, Bishop of Lindisfarne, 34.
Tunstall, 227.
Turburville, Richard, 281.
Turin, 209.
Turner, Bishop of Ely, 357.
Tyndale, 299.
Tyrrel, Sir Walter, 145.
Tytherley, 404.
Uguccione, Cardinal, 179.
Ulf, Bishop of Dorchester, 123.
•Uniformity, Act of, 301, ; ditto,
316, 325, 326; ditto, 352.
Urban II., Pope, 142, 143, 144, 145.
Urban V., Pope, 243.
Urban VI., Pope, 252.
Uxbridge, treaty of, 351.
469
Index
Vatican, 214.
Vaughan, Dr., Dean of Llandaff,
437. 44i-
Venice, 306.
Venner, Thomas, Fifth Monarchy
man, 374.
Vicarius of Mantua, 161.
Victoria, Queen, 396-434. 439, 44°,
441, 442.
Vienna, council of, 222.
Villiers, George, Duke of Bucking-
ham, 335, 337, 341.
Violent treatment of archbishop
of York, 179 ; of sub-prior of St.
Bartholomew's, 208.
Virgilius, Archbishop of Aries, 13.
Vitalian, Pope, 34, 35, 36, 37.
Viterbo, 193, 213, 309.
Vorstius, Professor, 335.
Wakefield, 333 ; battle of, 278.
Wake, William, 369-372.
Walden, Roger, 257, 258, 260-262 ;
arrest and deposition, 262.
Wales, marches of, 325 ; pastoral
visitation of, 184.
Wallingford, 127 ; treaty of, 163.
Walpole, Horace, 384.
Walsoken, 376.
Walstod, Bishop, 52.
Waltham, 296.
Waltham Abbey, 126.
Walton-on-Naze, 122.
Walter, Bishop of Albano, 144.
Walter, Bishop of Rochester, 164,
168.
Walter de Constance, 188.
Walter of Eynsham, 198.
Walter, Hervey, 186.
Walter, Prior of Canterbury, 163.
Walter, Hubert, 185, 186-191, 210.
Walter, Theobald, brother of Arch-
bishop Hubert Walter, 191.
Warbeck, Perkin, 286, 291.
Warham, William, 100, 290-294.
Warwick, Earl of, 256 ; ditto (the
King maker), 282 ; ditto, Edward
VI. 's reign, 301.
Water mixed with wine in Com-
munion, 422.
Watts, Dr. 381.
Wat Tyler, 249.
Wearmouth, 42.
Webb, Sir William, 339.
Wedmore, Treaty of, 76.
Wellesley, Dr., 440.
Wellington, College, 419.
Wellington, Duke of, 395, 400.
Wells, 211, 214, 243, 251.
Welsh Church, 216.
Wernherd, 69.
Wesleyans in Cornwall, 421.
Wesley, Charles, 374.
Wesley, John, 374.
Wessex, 14, 31, 39.
Westcott, Brooke Foss, 418, 437.
West Dereham, 186, 191.
West Gate, Canterbury, 250.
Westminster Abbey, 126, 265, 320,
330, 379. 430.
Westminster, 298, 380, 404 ; councils
at, 156, 178, 179, 199, 209, 233.
Westminster Hail, 220.
Wetheringsett, Sussex, 198.
Wethershed (or Grant), Richard,
198-200.
Wharton, Henry, 359.
Wherwell Abbey, 122.
Whitby, synod of, 33, 38.
White, Bishop of Peterborough,
357-
Whitefield, George, 374.
Whitgift, John, 323, 324-329, 330.
Whittlesea, 245.
Whittlesey, William, 243, 245-246.
Whitwell, 392.
Wigbert, Bishop of Sherborne, 68.
Wighard, 34, 35.
Wighed, 60.
Wightman, Edward, burned for
heresy, 335.
Wilberforce, Bishop, 428, 429.
Wilbrord, 45.
Wilfrid, Bishop of Northumbria,
33, 34. 36, 38, 39, 4°, 44, 45, 87.
Wilfrid II. of York, 87.
Wilkins, Dr. John, 362.
William de Corbeil, 155-158.
William de Raleigh, 207.
William de Sens, 178.
William, Duke of Normandy, 122,
123, 127, 132.
William, The Conqueror, 127, 128 ;
Ditto and the Pope, 136, 137.
William of Edendon, Bishop of
Winchester, 242.
William of Eynsf ord, excommunica-
tion of, 168.
William of Wykeham, Bishop of
Winchester, 248, 251, 256, 263.
William Rufus, 130, 137, 139, 155 ;
quarrels with Anselm, 143-145.
William III., 358-367, 37°-
William IV., 396, 405.
470
Index
Williams, Rev. Dr. Rowland, 402.
Wilson, Rev. H. B., 402.
Wilton, Abbey, 98.
Wiltshire, Earl of, (Anne Boleyn's
father), 296.
Wimbledon, 223.
Wimborne, 306.
Winchelsea, Robert, 218-222.
Winchelsea, Old, 218.
Winchester, 31, 46, 91, 95, 119, 124,
125, 129, 145, 160, 161, 195, 207,
209, 231, 260, 263, 264, 281, 290,
395, 400, 421, 435, 442 ; councils
at, 98, 128, 179.
Windsor, 149, 153, 157, 223, 277,
349, 379, 386, 392, 393, 438, 441-
Wisbech, 285, 376.
Witan and Christianity, 26.
Withington, 51.
Withred, King of Kent, 43.
Wolsey, Thomas, 289, 292, 296, 314.
Wolverhampton, 191.
Woodhall, Dr. John, 240, 243.
Woodstock, 168.
Worcester, 125, 179, 182, 224, 245,
253, 277, 325, 326, 347.
Wordsworth, Bishop of Lincoln,
420.
Wordsworth, Christopher, 393.
Wordsworth, Charles, Bishop, 434.
Wray, Thomas, 380.
Wren, Sir Christopher, 354, 356.
Wright, Robert, 391.
Wulfere, brother of Dunstan, 94, 95.
Wulfhelm, 81, 82-83, 86.
Wulfhere, King of Mercia, 33, 36.
Wulfred, 67-70.
Wulfstan, Archbishop of York,
94, no, 116.
Wulfstan, Bishop, 106, 126.
Wyclif, John (?the Reformer), 240,
243-
Wyclif, John, the Reformer, 248,
252.
Wydo, Abbot, 135.
Wye, 272, 275.
York, 23, 193, 197, 231, 243,
251, 255, 259, 260, 273, 275,
356, 377, 379. 4°4. 4°6 : con-
vention of, 279; payment to St.
Thomas's shrine, 239 (see also
Canterbury, Primacy of).
York, Richard, Duke of, 274, 276,
277, 278.
Zachray, Pope, 53.
Zouche, Lord, 336.
HEADLEY BROTHERS, PRINTfcRS BISHOPSGATE, E.C. ; AND A8.1FOKD, KENT.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY, LOS ANGELES
COLLEGE LIBRARY
This book is due on the last date stamped below.
Karl269j
m
23*70
OCT 231970
wneg9 fEB l?
Library
•J.
ci
J£B2§'?frS
Book Slip-35m-9,'62 (D2218s4)4280
UCLA-College Library
BX5198M21C
L 005 727 238 7
q.too
ft 13, ArS£ f^~f&.
College
Library
BX
£198
M21c
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
A 000 998 603 5
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11