6. THE PRIORY OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW SMITHFIELD
The honour of founding the priory of St. Bartholomew appears to belong jointly to a clerk
named Rahere (fn. 1) and to King Henry I, (fn. 2) for though
the means were supplied by the king, it is to the
enthusiasm of the clerk that both the origin and
success of the scheme must be ascribed. According to an account written by a canon of the
priory, apparently within seventy years of the
foundation of the house, (fn. 3) Rahere spent his early
life more like a courtier than a priest in attendance on the great nobles of his day, but experienced
a change of heart while at Rome on a pilgrimage.
He then fell ill and vowed, if he recovered, to
found a hospital. Afterwards he had a dream in
which St. Bartholomew appeared to him and
directed him to build a church in his honour at
Smithfield. (fn. 4) On his recovery and return to
England he obtained this land from the king, (fn. 5)
through the good offices of Richard bishop of
London, and on it he built a house and church
for a community of regular canons of whom he
became the first prior, and, in close proximity, a
hospital for the poor.
The author already quoted says this event took
place in 1123, (fn. 6) and there seems no reason to
doubt his statement, (fn. 7) though he is clearly mistaken
in assigning the consecration of the cemetery by
Bishop Richard to the thirtieth year of Henry I,
as the bishop died in 1128. Rahere's position
was a very difficult one, for in addition to the
ordinary anxieties attendant on the establishment
of a new foundation he had to contend with
intense enmity, on one occasion a plot being
made against his life. (fn. 8) The hostility towards him
seems to have come not entirely from one quarter,
for he intended to go to Rome to secure the
support of the pope, (fn. 9) although he had already
found in the king a powerful protector.
Henry gave the canons the site in West
Smithfield, and the churches of Gorleston,
St. Nicholas, Little Yarmouth, Lowestoft, and
Belton, (fn. 10) and also granted to them in 1133 very
ample charters (fn. 11) of privileges: he declared them
free from all services and customs except the
episcopal customs, viz. consecration of churches,
baptism and rule of the clergy; in all their lands
they were to have sac and soc, toll and team,
infangenthef and outfangenthef; to the prior was
granted the power to settle all disturbances of the
peace, assaults, and forfeitures in his demesne;
they were to be quit of shires and hundreds,
danegeld and other gelds, building and repairing
of castles, and of ferdwite, hegwite, wardpeni
and averpeni; throughout all the king's dominions their goods and men were to be free from
toll, passagium, pedagium, wharfage, lastage, and
stallage; and the king granted his firm peace to
those going to or returning from the fair held at
the priory for three days from the eve of St. Bartholomew. The king provided at the same time
that on Rahere's death the canons should choose
one of themselves as prior, but if there should not
be a suitable person there, they were free to
choose one from a well-known place; and that
gifts of lands were not to be alienated without
the consent of the chapter. (fn. 12) The house indeed
seems to have been regarded as a royal foundation, and as such protected and patronized.
Henry II confirmed all the privileges granted to
the canons by his grandfather, and added another
that they should not be impleaded save in the
king's presence; (fn. 13) Richard I laid down more
definite rules with regard to the fair, granting the
canons all the profits, forbidding the exaction of
customs or tolls from those coming to buy and
sell there, and ordering that no one should sell
on the canons' land without their permission; (fn. 14)
John took the canons, their men and possessions
into his protection, and forbade any interference
with the church which he calls his demesne
chapel; (fn. 15) and Henry III in 1227 confirmed their
charters. (fn. 16) But as usual the latter acted with an
entire absence of fairness when the canons came
into collision with one of his foreign favourites.
Boniface of Savoy, as archbishop of Canterbury,
was determined to exercise visitatorial powers in
London. After being repulsed at St. Paul's and
at the priory of Holy Trinity, he came to St. Bartholomew's. (fn. 17) The canons, dressed in their
most precious copes, received him with much
honour, but on hearing that he had come on a
visitation the sub-prior, the prior being absent,
informed him that the bishop of London alone
possessed this right, and they ought not to submit
to its exercise by another. The archbishop, beside himself with rage, struck the old man again
and again; the canons went to the rescue of the
sub-prior, and tried to drag him away; then Boniface's Provençal followers rushed into the church,
and a contest ensued in which the canons came
off badly, as they were not, like the archbishop,
equipped in armour beneath their vestments. By
the advice of the bishop of London four of the
canons went to the king to complain, but he
refused to hear them, and fearing the temper of
the Londoners, who were furious with the archbishop, he forbade anyone to interfere in the
controversy on pain of life and limb. Boniface
followed up his disgraceful conduct by excommunicating the convent officials, but this sentence
was shortly afterwards annulled by the pope. (fn. 18)
The canons, however, never received any compensation for their sufferings, for the archbishop
managed partly by threats, partly by promises, to
suppress their complaints, (fn. 19) and the question of
archiepiscopal visitations was decided against
them by the court of Rome in 1252. (fn. 20)
The disputes of the priory with the City, both
of which arose over the fair, were not marked
by any violence. The prior and canons, by the
counsel of the king's treasurer, William de
Haverille, and of their sokereeve John de
Kondres, set up on the first day of their fair
in 1246 a new 'tron,' with which all weighing
had to be done. (fn. 21) The mayor and the chief
men of the City went on the next day to the
priory and demanded that the practice should be
abandoned as it was in contravention of the
customs of the City, and the canons appear to
have yielded the point at once.
In 1292 an attempt was made by the warden
of London to deprive the priory of half the
profits of the fair, (fn. 22) but the prior must have given
satisfactory proof of his right to the whole, for
the City never made any further claim.
The priory during this time had been steadily
growing in wealth and importance. At the
death of Rahere the house depended largely on
obventions and charity, but the great increase in
temporalities noticed between 1144 and 1174 (fn. 23)
seems to have been well maintained. In London
it had received the church of St. Sepulchre from
Roger, bishop of Salisbury, (fn. 24) the church of
St. Michael Bassishaw (fn. 25) from G. bishop of
London (fn. 26) in the twelfth century, and St. Martin's, Ironmonger Lane, from Ralph Triket.
before 1253. (fn. 27) In Essex it possessed the manor
of Shortgrove, which it held as early as the reign
of Henry II; (fn. 28) half the church of Danbury, (fn. 29)
the gift of Earl William de Mandeville before
1190; (fn. 30) the hamlet of Langley, granted by
Robert Fitz Roger, to whom it had been given
by Henry II; (fn. 31) and the church of Theydon
Bois, given by William de Bosco in the latter
half of the twelfth century. (fn. 32) In co. Herts.
the canons held the church of Hemel Hempstead in 1201; (fn. 33) and in 1253 the king confirmed to them the manor of Little Stanmore,
the gift of William de Ramis, (fn. 34) to whom they
owed also the church of Bradfield, co. Essex; the
church of St. Laurence Stanmore, which had
been given to them by Roger de Ramis; (fn. 35) lands
in Shenley, obtained from Adam son of Elias de
Somery, and Saer (fn. 36) son of Henry; and lands
and rents in Tewin, given with land in
Hertford, Amwell, and 'Lockeleigh' by Alexander de Swereforde, canon and treasurer of
St. Paul's, to endow a chantry of four chaplains. (fn. 37) The king also confirmed to them in
1253 the church of Mentmore, co. Bucks,
which had been given to the priory by Hugh
Bussell and William son of Miles, and half the
church of Wenhaston, co. Suffolk, granted by
Geoffrey Fitz Ailwin. (fn. 38) Between 1323 and 1353
lands were added for the establishment of chantries and anniversaries in Theydon Bois, (fn. 39) co.
Essex, and in London, (fn. 40) Acton, (fn. 41) Kentish Town,
and Islington, (fn. 42) co. Middlesex, in which last
place the priory had a holding in 1253. (fn. 43)
The priory must have been popular in the
City: in 1291 it had holdings in forty-eight
London parishes, (fn. 44) and it is reasonable to suppose
that much of this property was derived from
London citizens, seeing that in the fourteenth
century bequests from them were so numerous. (fn. 45)
The standing of the house is probably shown by
the frequent choice of the prior as collector of
the clerical tenth. (fn. 46)
The archbishop of Canterbury visited the
priory in 1303, and made certain ordinances: (fn. 47)
the rule of silence is to be better observed by
the canons; money is not to be assigned them
for their clothes, but garments are to be allotted
as needed, and the officer charged with this duty is
never to give them before the old ones are handed
up to him; the canons who are ill in the infirmary are to be provided with suitable food
according to the means of the monastery; the
doors of the cloister and the houses in it are to
be kept more strictly and closed at proper hours,
so that the brothers may not be disturbed at service by the concourse of people. There was
evidently little fault to be found with the monastery, and corroboration as to its satisfactory state
is furnished by the fact that in 1306 the bishop
of London, after deposing the prior of St. Mary's,
Bishopsgate, put the sub-prior of St. Bartholomew's in his place, (fn. 48) and in 1308 sent to St. Bartholomew's a canon of St. Osyth's to be disciplined
for his wrongdoing. (fn. 49) The injunction ordering
that no liveries are to be sold without the permission of the bishop or archbishop, and that
the powers granted are not to be exceeded, (fn. 50)
seems to indicate that money was needed just
then, possibly for building, as additions were
certainly made to the church soon afterwards. (fn. 51)
It seems probable that disputes between the
priory and the hospital arose at an early date,
for King John in 1203 (fn. 52) declared that the hospital was at the disposition of the prior and
canons, and that whoever would separate it
from that church should come into the royal
right; and Eustace bishop of London made an
arrangement between them a few years later. (fn. 53)
At length serious discord between the two houses
made a settlement imperative, and this was
accomplished by Simon bishop of London in
1373. (fn. 54) The authority of the priory over the
hospital was maintained in a general way, viz.
the brothers had to ask leave of the prior to
elect a master and obtain his confirmation of
their choice, and new brothers and sisters had
to swear fealty to the prior. If the prior
was practically excluded from interference
with the internal affairs of the hospital, he was
freed from all responsibility for its maintenance.
The advantages of the arrangement doubtless
became more apparent to the priory at the
beginning of the next century, when it experienced great difficulty in raising sufficient money
for its own needs. In 1409 the monastery was
in debt through the rebuilding of the cloister,
bell-tower, and chapter-house, and further necessary work was prevented by lack of funds.
Meanwhile its income had fallen off: inroads of
the sea had seriously affected its property in the
neighbourhood of Yarmouth; tenements in
London, from which ten years ago an income
of 100 marks had been derived, now did not
yield half that sum; and through the malice of
a powerful enemy the endowment of a chantry
had been lost, while the obligation of maintaining two priests for celebrating masses still remained. (fn. 55) The prior John de Watford, who
was present at the Council of Pisa, (fn. 56) made use
of his opportunity to plead the cause of his
house, and Pope Alexander, the day after his
election to the papacy, (fn. 57) granted a special indulgence to penitents who during a period of ten
years visited the priory on the three days before
Easter and on the Festival of the Assumption,
and gave alms; and he empowered the prior to
choose six priests to hear confessions on these
occasions. (fn. 58)
The priory, however, seems to have plunged
deeper and deeper into debt. When the bishop
of London visited the house in 1433, (fn. 59) he found
its affairs seriously embarrassed through extravagance and bad management: its income was
about £500, and it owed much more than this
sum, annual pensions and corrodies alone amounting to £107. Decided measures were necessary
if the priory was ever to be freed from its obligations, and the bishop, at the request of the
convent, took the financial administration for the
time being entirely out of the hands of the prior
and convent, and appointed his commissary to
receive all the revenues, rendering an account
twice a year to the convent in the presence of
Walter Shuryngton, chancellor of the duchy of
Lancaster. To the prior was assigned a sum of
£20 for his maintenance, to each canon 100s.,
and to each clerk 48s. 4d., while small amounts
were also allotted for pittances and as provision
in case of sickness. Beyond these expenses and
an allowance of £40 for repairs to property, the
whole income of the house was to be devoted to
the payment of debts.
At the end of the fifteenth century there was
some ill-feeling between the priory and the City,
and in consequence the drapers and tailors of
London determined not to take booths in the
precinct at the time of the fair. (fn. 60)
William Bolton, who became prior about
1506, made extensive improvements to both
priory and church. (fn. 61) He had evidently great
talent as a builder, and was appointed master
of the king's works by Henry VIII. (fn. 62) At the
chapter of the order in 1518 the excuse made
and accepted for his absence was the royal business; the same reason might possibly have been
offered for his neglect to fulfil the office of visitor
in the diocese of London, but in this case he was
fined £10. (fn. 63)
Apparently his capacity lay all in the one
direction, as when Wolsey tried to secure the see
of St. Asaph for him in 1518, the king refused
on the ground that though masters of the works
had been promoted before, it had been not for
their skill in building, but for other qualifications,
such as profound learning. (fn. 64) For some years
before he died in 1532 he was very infirm, (fn. 65) and
his death was expected in 1527 when the friends
of William Fynch, the cellarer, offered to contribute £300 to Wolsey's college at Oxford if
the cardinal would help Fynch to obtain the
post. (fn. 66) It is evident that outside influence was of
great importance in elections at this time, for in
1529 another candidate was soliciting Cromwell's
support, (fn. 67) and Robert Fuller, abbot of Waltham,
who finally obtained the priory in commendam, (fn. 68)
promised Cromwell to recompense him largely
for his favour. (fn. 69)
The orthodoxy and the conduct of the canons
must have been considered unexceptionable, or
otherwise the judges of John Tewkesbury, on condemning him for heresy in 1531, would not have
sent him to this monastery to remain there until
released by the bishop of London. (fn. 70) It is certain,
however, that Prior Robert was always prepared
to adapt his views to those of the king in religious matters, for the compliance of the prior
and canons can be read in the terms they secured
when the priory was surrendered in October,
1539: (fn. 71) Fuller received a life grant of most of
the property of the priory; (fn. 72) to the sub-prior
was assigned an annual pension of £15; to each
of ten canons one of £6 13s. 4d.; and to two
others one of £5 each. (fn. 73) The pensions also
seem to have been paid with great regularity. (fn. 74)
The number of inmates shows a great decrease
from that of earlier times: in 1174 there had
been thirty-five canons in the priory, (fn. 75) and there
were twenty in 1381, (fn. 76) thirty years after the
depopulation caused by the Black Death. The
officers of the house included sub-prior, cellarer,
sacristan, infirmarer, refector, and chamberlain. (fn. 77)
The income of the house in 1291 appears to
have been about £152, (fn. 78) of which more than
half was derived from property in London. (fn. 79) At
the Dissolution its revenues were reckoned at
£773 0s. 1¾d. gross, and £693 0s. 10¼d. net, (fn. 80)
rents and ferms in London and the suburbs alone
amounting to £451 3s. 7d. (fn. 81) Its property at
that time comprised the manors of Canonbury,
Acton, Renters in Hendon, Great Stanmore,
Canons in Little Stanmore, and lands in Portpool, Little Stanmore and 'Shardington,' perhaps Charlton, co. Middlesex; (fn. 82) the manors of
Langley Hall in Clavering, (fn. 83) and Shortgrove, (fn. 84)
and meadowland in Walthamstow, (fn. 85) co. Essex;
the manors of Tewin, (fn. 86) Holmes in Shenley, (fn. 87)
and Walhall, (fn. 88) co. Herts.; the church of St.
Sepulchre, which had very early been appropriated to the priory, (fn. 89) the church of Theydon
Bois, co. Essex, which the canons had received
licence to appropriate in 1335; (fn. 90) the rectories of
Bradfield, co. Essex, Gorleston, Lowestoft, co.
Suffolk, and Mentmore, (fn. 91) co. Bucks., and the
advowson of the church of Tewin; (fn. 92) the oblations of the chapel of St. Mary, Yarmouth, (fn. 93) and
pensions from the churches of Wenhaston, co.
Suffolk, and Danbury, (fn. 94) co. Essex. In 1291 (fn. 95)
and 1428 (fn. 96) the priory had also received a portion
of 2 marks from the church of Sunbury in
Middlesex.
The prior held in 1303 a quarter of a knight's
fee in Bradfield, (fn. 97) and a fraction of a fee in
Tewin; (fn. 98) in 1316 he held a whole fee in Little
Stanmore; (fn. 99) in 1346, a quarter of a fee in
Bradfield; (fn. 100) in 1428 he still held this quarter
fee in Bradfield, (fn. 101) and appears to have held
moreover half a knight's fee in Acton and a
quarter in Islington. (fn. 102)
The church was rich in plate, possessing at the
suppression of the priory more than 500 oz. of
gilt plate, 370 oz. of parcel gilt, and 311 oz. of
white plate. (fn. 103)
Priors of St. Bartholomew's, West Smithfield
Rahere, occurs 1123 (fn. 104) and 1133, (fn. 105) died
1144 (fn. 106)
Thomas, elected 1144, died 1174 (fn. 107)
Alan, occurs c. 1181 (fn. 108) –1204
Richard, occurs 1202–3 (fn. 109)
G., elected and resigned 1213 (fn. 110)
John, removed 1232 (fn. 111)
Gerald, elected 1232, (fn. 112) occurs 1233 (fn. 113) and
1237–8 (fn. 114)
Peter le Duc, occurs 1242 and 1251, (fn. 115) resigned 1256 (fn. 116)
Robert, elected 1256, (fn. 117) occurs 1257 (fn. 118)
Gilbert de Weledon, elected 1262 (fn. 119)
John Bacun, occurs 1264 (fn. 120)
Hugh, occurs 1274, (fn. 121) died 1295 (fn. 122)
John, occurs 1306, (fn. 123) 1317, (fn. 124) 1321, (fn. 125) 1323 (fn. 126)
John, occurs 1338, 1339, (fn. 127) and 1340, (fn. 128) died
1350 (fn. 129)
Edmund de Braughyngg, elected 1350, (fn. 130)
resigned 1356 (fn. 131)
John de Carleton, elected 1356 (fn. 132)
Thomas Watford, occurs 1362, (fn. 133) died 1382 (fn. 134)
William Gedney, elected 1382, (fn. 135) resigned
1391 (fn. 136)
John Eyton or Repyngdon, elected 1391 (fn. 137)
Simon Wynchecombe, occurs 1392 and
1393 (fn. 138)
John Eyton, occurs 1394, died 1404 (fn. 139)
John de Watford, occurs 1406 and 1413, (fn. 140)
resigned 1414 (fn. 141)
William Coventree, occurs 1433 (fn. 142)
Reginald, occurs 1437 (fn. 143)
John, occurs 1439 (fn. 144)
Reginald Colyer, occurs 1445, (fn. 145) 1453, (fn. 146) and
1465, (fn. 147) died 1471 (fn. 148)
Richard Pulter, elected 1471, (fn. 149) occurs 1473, (fn. 150)
died 1480 (fn. 151)
Robert Tollerton, elected 1480, (fn. 152) died 1484 (fn. 153)
William Guy, elected 1484, (fn. 154) occurs 1489,
1501, and 1504 (fn. 155)
William Bolton, elected 1505, (fn. 156) died 1532 (fn. 157)
Robert Fuller, elected 1532, (fn. 158) surrendered
1539 (fn. 159)
A fine example of the common seal of the
priory is attached to a charter of 1533. (fn. 160) The
obverse represents St. Bartholomew, seated on a
carved throne, holding a book in his right hand
and a knife in his left. In the field, on the left
a crescent, on the right a star, each between
two groups of three small spots. The style of
work is of the thirteenth century. Legend:—
SIGILLVM: COMMVNE: PRIOR' ET: COPVQTV[S:
SBI: BA]RTHOLOMEI: LONDON'.
On the reverse is a church, with central spire,
a cross at each gable end, masoned wall imitating
ashlar-work and traceried windows, standing on
a ship with a castle at each end, that on the left
pointed, that on the right square, on the sea.
In the field at the sides the inscription:—
NAVIS ECCL'E
Legend:—
CREDIMVS: ANTE: DEVM: PROVEHI: PER:
BARTHOLOMEVM
A seal 'ad Causas' of the fourteenth century (fn. 161)
is a pointed oval, and represents St. Bartholomew
standing on a corbel, holding in his right hand a
knife, in his left a long cross. Legend:—
. . . . ET CONV . . . . . . . . THOL'I
LOND' AD CAVS . . . .