EALDRED AND GLOUCESTER ABBEY.

667

NOTE NN. p. 435.

THE ABBEY OF GLOUCESTER AND ITS CONNEXION WITH
ARCHBISHOP EALDRED.

THE early history of Gloucester and of the changes in the foundation of its great ecclesiastical establishment is given at length in the local history, the "Historia Monasterii S. Petri Gloucestria" edited by Mr. Hart. The change from nuns to secular canons is thus described (i. 7); "Speciositas relligionis in monasterio Gloucestriæ per translationem sororum ibidem exsistentium, huc atque illuc bellum et peccatum fugiendum, sub potestate sæculari, usque ad tempus Wolstani Episcopi Wygorniensis, qui fuit anno ab Incarnatione Domini millesimo secundo, mirifice tradebatur." One might have thought that this meant an utter suppression of the monastery and its transfer to lay hands, but the real meaning appears from what follows (i. 8); "Anno Domini millesimo vicesimo secundo Wolstanus, episcopus Wygorniensis, qui postea factus est archiepiscopus Eboracensis, concedente Rege Cnuto, duce Danorum, qui Ecclesiam sanctam exaltavit, et libertates suas antiquas renovavit ac promovit, ut dicit Petrus Pictavensis; hic Wolstanus clericos qui ecclesiam Sancti Petri antea rexerant [et] custodierant, sub protectione Dei et Apostolorum Petri et Pauli et regulâ beati Benedicti, in eâdem ecclesiâ regulariter collocavit." In this case the Canons seem not to have been driven out, but to have taken the monastic vows on themselves. This was partly the case at Bury (see vol. i. p. 436), where, according to Roger of Wendover (i. 464), "Rex. . . . Cnuto. . . . presbyteros qui ibidem ordinate vixerant ["clericis qui ibidem inordinate vivebant, inde ejectis" says John of Oxenedes, p. 19] aut in eodem loco ad culmen relligionis provexit, aut rebus illis aliis collatis, unde solito abundantius viverent, ad alia loca migrare fecit." The mismanagement of Abbot Eadric went so far that two lordships had to be sold to make good the losses caused by him (Hist. Glouc. i. 8); "Multa bona dissipavit, quoniam tempore suo, in perpetuam exhæredationem, vendita fuerunt maneria de Beggeworth, de Hatherleye." The immediate cause of their sale was to enable the Abbey to pay a heregild levied throughout England. "Quibus," says Eadric himself in a deed printed in the

local History (i. 8), “redemi omnia alia prædia monasterii ab illâ magnâ heregeldi exactione, quæ per totam Angliam fuit.” (On Heregild see above, p. 598.) This is probably the Danegeld of 1018 (see vol. i. p. 415), still spread over several years.

One might be inclined to think that Archbishop Wulfstan retained for himself and his successors some special rights of patronage over the Abbey, as in the account of the appointment of Abbot Wulfstan, the Bishop of the Diocese figures in a way which certainly is not usual. Ealdred first rebuilt the church, as we read in the Worcester Chronicle (1058); "On þam ilcan gere Ealdred bisceop halgode pat mynster on Gleawcestre pe he sylf gefordode, Gode to lofe and Sce Petre." To this Florence adds the appointment of the Abbot; "Aldredus Wigorniensis episcopus ecclesiam, quam in civitate Glawornâ a fundamentis construxerat, in honorem principis Apostolorum Petri honorifice dedicavit; et postea, Regis licentiâ, Wlstanum Wigornensem monachum a se ordinatum abbatem constituit ibidem." There is no mention here of any election by the monks; we hear only of an Abbot chosen by the Bishop under a licence from the King.

The charge of defrauding the Church of Gloucester of its lands is brought against Ealdred by the local historian (i. 9); "Caussâ magis hospitii quam operis sui abstulit a communi Leche, Odynton, Standische, cum Bertonâ, retinens in manu suâ." He is also charged in William of Malmesbury's Life of Saint Wulfstan (Ang. Sac. ii. 251) with dealing in the same way with the Church of Worcester on his consecration of Wulfstan; “Illum Aldredus potentiâ qua vigebat multis et pene omnibus, ut post clarebit, prædiis vellicaverit" (see p. 464). Wulfstan however (Ang. Sac. ii. 252) recovered most of the lost property. Gloucester seems to have been less lucky. The charge against Ealdred is confirmed by several entries in Domesday, 164 b; "Eldred archiepiscopus tenuit Stanedis. De dominio Sancti Petri de Glouuecestre fuit." "Sanctus Petrus de Glouuecestre tenuit Lecce, et Eldred archiepiscopus tenuit cum abbatiâ." Both these are lordships in Gloucestershire, which were still held by the see of York at the time of the Survey. Of a third lordship in the same list we read, "Eldredus archiepiscopus tenuit Otintune... Thomas archiepiscopus tenet. Sanctus Petrus de Glouuecestre habuit in dominio donec Rex Willelmus in Angliam venit." This would

ABBOTS MANNIG AND ETHELWIG.

669

almost seem to mean that Ealdred, who was, for some time at least, in William's favour, went on with his spoliations of the monks of Gloucester after William's accession. Thomas Stubbs has nothing to tell us about the Gloucester matter, but he alleges (1702) that Ealdred kept twelve of the Worcester lordships with the consent and approval of King Eadward, because of the poverty into which the Church of York had been brought by the barbarians in the days of Archbishop Wulfhere, that is to say in the days of Ælfred.

I may mention that there are three Wulfstans who must be carefully distinguished. First, Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester, Archbishop of York, and founder of Gloucester Abbey. Secondly,

the one mentioned in the text, Wulfstan or, as the local historian calls him, Wistan, monk of Worcester, and Abbot of Gloucester. Lastly, Saint Wulfstan, monk, Prior, and Bishop of Worcester. All three were alive at once, and the last two were strictly contemporary, and all had more or less to do with Worcester and Gloucester.

NOTE OO. p. 437.

ABBOTS MANNIG AND ETHELWIG.

THERE is a chronological difficulty as to the accession of Æthelwig. The Evesham Chronicle fixes the date of his benediction to Saint George's day (April 23rd, 1059). Mannig, we are told, died on the same day as King Eadward, that is, January 5th, 1066. The Evesham writer (p. 88) wrongly makes it the day of the Epiphany itself; "Transiit quoque vir ille Mannius eâdem nocte et horâ quâ Rex gloriosus Æduuardus, festivitate videlicet sanctæ Epiphaniæ Domini." His death, so the historian says, happened seven years after his resignation. This makes the year of Æthelwig's appointment 1059. For the day and place we are told (88), "Rex . . . fecit eum apud Glocestre, ubi tunc curiam suam tenebat, coram multis principibus hujus patriæ ab Aldredo Archiepiscopo honorabiliter in paschali sollemnitate, die festivitatis Sancti Georgii martyris, consecrari." Now it is hardly likely that Ealdred, who had left for Jerusalem seemingly not very early in the year before, could have been again in England so soon as Saint George's day, 1059. Also it was not the Easter but the Christmas festival which was

....

commonly held at Gloucester. That Ealdred is called Archbishop before his time is a common slip. Perhaps (see Mr. Macray's note on p. 87) the reckoning of seven years is wrong, and the date was really 1058, before Ealdred left England; or the wrong season may be given (though this seems hardly likely, and the usual places of the Gemóts were sometimes departed from); or the ceremony may have been really performed by some other Bishop, and Ealdred's name may have been carelessly inserted because he was known to be Bishop of the diocese at the time.

NOTE PP. p. 438.

HAROLD'S FOUNDATION AT WALTHAM.

OUR knowledge about Waltham and Harold's foundation there comes mainly from the two local books of which I have already spoken (see p. 428), from the charter of Eadward (Cod. Dipl. iv. 154) confirming the foundation, and from various incidental notices, especially in the writers who record the establishment of the monastery by Henry the Second. There is no plainer piece of history in the world than that Harold founded a body of secular Canons, and that Henry displaced them to make room for regular Canons. Without turning either to the local writers or to the historians of Henry's day, it is enough to turn to William of Malmesbury, iii. 247; "Ecclesiam . .. canonicis impleverat." Yet a whole string of modern writers, one after another, talk of Waltham, as founded by Harold, as an abbey or monastery. When I say that the mistake is found in Sharon Turner (Hist. Eng. i. 79, 81), in Sir Francis Palgrave (Hist. Ang. Sax. 378, 388), and in Lappenberg (p. 556 of the original, ii. 302 of Mr. Thorpe's translation), it is not wonderful that it is found also in Thierry (i. 254), as well as in Dr. Vaughan (Revolutions of English History, i. 298), in M. de Bonnechose (ii. 283), and in Mr. St. John (ii. 275). But they are all outdone by Mr. C. H. Pearson (Early and Middle Ages, i. 345), who talks of "the monks of Waltham Abbey" in a note in which he refers to Professor Stubbs' edition of the De Inventione.

The grant of the former estate of Tofig to Harold is recorded in

HAROLD'S FOUNDATION AT WALTHAM.

671

the De Inventione, c. 14. So in the Charter, Eadward says, "Cuidam meorum Comitum, onomate Haroldo, quamdam terram quæ antiquitus ab incolis illius loci nuncupatur Waltham hæreditario jure concessi." "Hæreditario jure" here, as often (see vol. iii. p. 682), means not a right handed down from a man's fathers, but a right to be handed on to his children.

The order followed by Harold in his work at Waltham is well marked in the Charter and in the other accounts. The general objects of the foundation cannot be better set forth than they are by Harold's romantic biographer (pp. 160-161), this being the sort of subject on which local romance is as trustworthy as history. "At vir magnificus," he says, "locum et loci cultum omnimodis cupiens cum suis cultoribus sublimare, novam ibi basilicam fabricare, ministrorum augere numerum, redditusque eorum proponit ampliare, utque celebriorem famâ, illustriorem clericorum frequentiâ, cœlestibus nobilitatum muneribus, locum terrigenis exhiberet, scholas ibidem institui. . . . dispositione satagebat prudenti." How any one could have mistaken this for the foundation of a monastery is truly wonderful. The Charter follows the same order; first comes the building of the church; "In præscripto loco monasterium ad laudem Domini nostri Jesu Christi et sanctæ Crucis construxit." The use of " monasterium" as applied to the fabric of the church, even in a secular foundation (see vol. i. p. 424), hardly needs illustration. The highest authority for its use is the Emperor Frederick, who in his letter to Otto of Freisingen, prefixed to that Prelate's history of him, calls Saint Peter's at Rome indifferently "basilica" and "monasterium Sancti Petri." In the De Inventione also (c. 16) we read of "venusto admodum opere a fundamentis constructam [ecclesiam]," and the romantic Biographer (p. 161) gives a much fuller description of the building, of which I shall have something to say in another volume. Next in the Charter after the building of the church comes the confirmation of the original grant of Tofig; "Primum concedens ei terram quæ vocatur Norðlande, unde ecclesiam villæ antiquitus dotatam invenit." Then comes the consecration; "Post fundatum dehinc sacræ fidei monasterium ad normam sanctæ Dei ecclesiæ dedicari fecit honorifice ob memoriam mei et conjugis meæ nomine Eadiča, patris ac matris, pro se suisque omnibus vivis et defunctis sibi consanguinitate conjunctis." Then the Charter speaks of the relics, books,