2. THE ABBEY OF SELBY
The abbey of St. Mary and St. German of
Selby claimed the Conqueror for its founder, but
its origin was due to Benedict, a monk at
Auxerre. The legend (fn. 1) is that Benedict, when
a monk at Auxerre, was warned in a dream by
St. German to go to England, whither he came,
bringing with him as a relic a finger of the saint.
Somehow he got to Salisbury, where a person
named Edward gave him a beautiful wrought
golden shrine to hold the relic, which was afterwards exhibited at Selby. He left for the place
in Yorkshire indicated to him in the vision, and
established himself as a hermit about the year
1068, at the place which afterwards became
known as Selby. Here he was found by Hugh,
the Sheriff of Yorkshire, by whom he was brought
into contact with William the Conqueror, then
possibly at York. The Conqueror granted a
small piece of land on which to build the monastery, and this grant he largely increased by a
subsequent charter a year or two afterwards.
Why William the Conqueror should have
chosen Selby for founding the monastery has
always been unexplained. Probably Canon
Fowler's suggestion is the true explanation of
the matter, viz., ' that Hugh the sheriff was so
impressed by the holiness and reputation of
Benedict and his wonder-working relic that he
induced the king to provide that in place of an
anchor-hold, there should spring up an abbey, of
which the anchorite should be the first abbot.' (fn. 2)
The date of the foundation charter seems to
be fixed at about 1070. Symeon of Durham
says that Selby Abbey sumpsit exordium in 1069,
and as Bishop Remigius, one of the witnesses,
was consecrated in 1070, the latter seems to be
the probable date of the charter. (fn. 3) In the foundation charter (fn. 4) the king granted to Abbot Benedict
leave to found an abbey in ' Salebya,' in honour
of Our Lord Jesus Christ, His blessed Mother
the Virgin Mary, and St. German, Bishop of
Auxerre, and gave the abbey its own court, with
sac and soc, and tol and theam, and infangenthef,
and all the better customs as the church of
St. Peter of York.
More than eighty charters, confirmations, and
other royal deeds in favour of Selby Abbey are
recorded in the Coucher Book, (fn. 5) and the grants
of land and other property from different donors
were enormous. They are epitomized by Burton alphabetically according to the places themselves, on sixteen folio pages of his work. (fn. 6)
A dispute as to the extent of the province of
Canterbury arose in 1067, when Remigius
moved his see from Dorchester in Oxfordshire to
Lincoln. The Archbishops of York had always
claimed that Lindsey belonged to their diocese
and province, and eventually William Rufus
settled the matter by giving Lindsey to the
Archbishop of Canterbury, and Selby Abbey and
the priory of St. Oswald at Gloucester to the
Archbishop of York. His charter states (fn. 7) that
he had given to Archbishop Thomas and his
successors the abbey of St. German 'sicut
archiepiscopus Cantuariensis habet episcopatum
Rofensem.' It seems that Gundulf recognized
the archbishop as patron of the see of Rochester,
so that what the king gave was probably the
patronage of Selby. The archbishop apparently
regranted their privileges to the monks not long
after, and they afterwards elected their abbots by
licence from the crown. (fn. 8)
On 1 April 1233 Archbishop Gray held a
visitation of the abbey of Selby, (fn. 9) and the injunctions he gave on that occasion are among the
earliest examples extant of anything of the kind.
First, he enjoined the abbot to apply the highest
care as to the observance of the discipline of the
order and rule. He was to arrange the business
of the house, according to the rule of the blessed
Benedict, with the advice of four of the more
skilful of the house, chosen by himself and the
convent. With their advice he was to appoint two
cellarers, one within the house, and the other
for external affairs. The abbot, by the advice
of his four associate monks, was to appoint two
bursars who were to receive all the money coming
to the monastery, which was to be expended for
the common utility of the house, according to
the decision of the abbot and other officers.
The refectory, kitchen, infirmary, and camera
were to be competently provided for, lest by
defect of necessaries the servants of God should
murmur, or should procure things less honest
outside. Diligent and fit officials were to be
appointed to every office. The proper number
of monks was to be made up. (fn. 10) The archbishop
ordered that his scriptum was to be recited three
times in the current year by the abbot in the
presence of the convent, at appropriate terms,
lest aught be neglected through forgetfulness.
He reserved, however, to himself power to
interpret, relax, or correct, or do anything else,
which might seem to him to be good for the
utility of the monastery.
On 31 May 1256 (fn. 11) Pope Alexander IV
granted a faculty to the Abbot of Selby to use
the ring, mitre, pastoral staff, tunic, dalmatic,
gloves and sandals, and to bless altar-cloths and
other church ornaments, and to give the first
tonsure. This faculty appears to have fallen
into disuse not long after it was granted, for on
11 April 1308 Archbishop Greenfield sent a
formal letter to the abbot and convent, saying that
he had inspected the Apostolic Letters, and, with
consent of the dean and chapter, he granted that
the abbot might use the foresaid insignia, (fn. 12)
which per aliqua tempora the abbot of the monastery had omitted to use.
When Archbishop Giffard visited the monastery and its dependent cell of Snaith, by
commission, in 1275 (fn. 13) several of the monks
were charged with loose living, including the
abbot, and many of the complaints referred
to misconduct with married women. The
abbot at that time was Thomas de Whalley,
who had previously held the abbacy and been
deprived. (fn. 14) Things did not mend, and on
8 January 1279-80 (fn. 15) Archbishop Wickwane
made a visitation of the abbey in person, when it
was found that the abbot did not observe the
rule, did not sing mass (missam non cantat), did
not preach or teach, and seldom attended chapter,
he did not correct as he was bound to do, rarely
took his meals in the refectory, never slept in the
dormitory, rarely entered the quire, rarely heard
matins out of bed, did not visit the sick, publicly
ate flesh meat before laymen in his manors and
elsewhere outside the precincts of his monastery,
and even in the monastery on Wednesdays
indiscriminately, was haughty and malicious
(injuriosus) towards his brethren, quarrelsome, and
a disturber in the convent, despised and neglected
altogether the statutes of the archbishops, and, in
short, was negligent and ill-disposed in all that
pertained to divine affairs and regular discipline,
and was altogether incorrigible. More than this,
he had alienated, without consent of his convent,
lands, manors, tithes, corrodies, &c. The lands
were specified, including the manor of Chellow
near Bradford, and that of Stainton in Craven.
He had given three estates, which are specified,
to his brother John, who in 1275 had been
charged with immorality. He had given a pension of 4 marks to his nephew Thomas. The
tithes of Driffield, and the money he had
received from alienations he had made, he had
spent as he liked. Owing to his neglect he had
lost the rent and tithe of various places, which
are named. In the liberty of Snaith he had
handed over the manors to be kept by his
relatives, garcionibus et rybaldis, and when he
received anything from them for corn and other
things sold, he spent it as he liked, without rendering an account. He appointed obedientiaries according to his will, who were favourable
to him, and from whom he got money and other
goods of the house. He cut down and sold
groves, and spent the money as he liked.
Worse still was proved against him. He was
found guilty of incontinence with the lady of
Whenby (domina de Queneby) and with a girl,
Bodeman, living at the monastery gate, who, as
reported, had borne him offspring. He was
perjured, too, for he swore before his last installation that he would restore the charters of Stallingborough as soon as he was installed, and
hitherto had not done so. He was excommunicate, both because he had not paid the pope's
tithe and had turned to other uses the tithes of
the chapel of Wheatley assigned for alms, as also
for despising the statutes of Archbishop Gray,
and because he had laid violent hands on Brother
Robert de Eboraco to the effusion of blood, and
also on William de Stormeworthe, dragging him
from the quire. He had also laid hands on
Thomas de Snayth, clerk, drawing blood from
him, whom he had appointed to recover certain
tithes at Snaith. He was further charged with
incantation and sorcery, in procuring Elyas
Fauvelle to seek for the body of his brother, who
had been drowned in the River Ouse, and on
this he spent a large sum of money. Thus for
these reasons he was excommunicate, but had
taken part in divine affairs in spite of it. This
string of misdeeds of all sorts having been proved
against the unworthy abbot, the archbishop
pronounced formal sentence of deposition, and
transferred the deposed abbot to the monastery
of Durham, there to undergo a penance appointed for the good of his soul. On Tuesday
before the feast of the Epiphany Thomas de
Whalley formally confessed himself to have been
duly amoved by the archbishop, and submitted
himself to the sentence passed upon him.
In 1306 (fn. 16) Archbishop Greenfield held a
visitation of Selby, when it was again apparent
that matters were seriously amiss. One of the
monks, Henry de Belton, for his enormities was
handed over to the Abbot of St. Mary's, York, to
be sent to their far-off cell of Rumburgh, in
Suffolk, at an annual charge of 4 marks, to be
paid by Selby; but from a subsequent letter of
the archbishop it would seem that he was being
detained at St. Mary's, and the archbishop then
directed the abbot to dispatch him, with a safe
convoy, to St. Bees. Another monk, Thomas
de Wilmerley, was sent at the same time and
at the same costs to Whitby; both had prescribed
penances appointed them, and the archbishop
further commissioned his official to inquire into
the miserable condition of another monk, Thomas
de Eyton. (fn. 17)
On 20 March 1315 (fn. 18) the dean and chapter,sede
vacante, wrote to the Abbot and convent of Whitby
in regard to Robert de Brune, a monk of Selby,
whom the archbishop had transferred there to
undergo a penance. The Abbot and convent
of Whitby had reported well concerning him,
and for the future he was to hold among them
locum suo statu competentem, and on Wednesday
to have the same food as the rest, but on Fridays
he was to have only bread, ale, vegetables and
one kind of fish, until his case should merit
further favourable consideration.
On 9 April 1322 (fn. 19) Abbot John de Wystow II
sent to Archbishop Melton a full account of the
status of the monastery on the feast of St. Stephen,
1320, when his predecessor Simon de Scarborough
died. The monastery was still in debt to the
amount of £551 8s., and was then burdened by
pensions and fees amounting to £44 16s. 8d.
yearly, also fifteen corrodies of food and drink
to fifteen persons daily during their lives, of
whom eight were receiving daily food for themselves and their servants (garcionibus) and seven
food for themselves only, eleven of them also
receiving clothes (robas) yearly. Besides this,
the grain of the monastery was deficient. The
revenues and rents, which the abbot's predecessor
and the cellarer of the house were accustomed
to receive in different places, had, at the time of
his decease, depreciated by more than 100 marks
a year.
Archbishop Melton held a visitation of Selby
on 10 July 1324, (fn. 20) when he found the house
heavily in debt and burdened by pensions.
The abbot and all the officials were exhorted
to use moderation. The infirmary, it was
stated, was built in an improper and base position,
so that the sick brethren were in danger from the
stench and infected atmosphere; if that was so,
then, as soon as the means of the house permitted,
another infirmary was to be built.
Markets and sales in the cemetery of the
church were inhibited, and linen cloths were not
to be bleached there by women.
All the monks were to be uniform as to habit
according to the old fashion, and neither to
introduce any novelties, nor to sell their habits,
but they were to receive necessary habits from
one of the vestiarii, and the old ones were to
be given to poor persons asking for them.
On 27 December 1335 (fn. 21) Archbishop Melton
reported to the abbot and convent, that at his
recent visitation of their monastery he had
found six of their number gravely defamed of
crimes and excesses mentioned in the articles he
sent to them.
Adam de la Breuer was defamed super lapsu
carnis with Alice, daughter of Roger the Smith
of Selby, and of incontinence with her sister
also. He was commonly drunk, riotous and
a sower of discord among the brethren. He
gossiped carelessly and improperly with women
in the cloister, church, and elsewhere, and
particularly with the before-mentioned Alice and
her sister, to the scandal of the order. Moreover he abstracted different things belonging to
the monastery, having secret little places in his
clothes adapted for his thefts. He had abused
every one of the monks who had told the truth
at the visitation. He was wont to leave the
quire before the conclusion of divine service, not
having sought, or obtained, leave to do so. He
sent alms and other goods of the house to the
women with whom he had been often convicted.
Thomas de Hirst sent alms and gave other
aliments of goods of the house to Margaret the
maidservant of Felicia, and six other women
dwelling in the town of Selby. He behaved
lasciviously and dissolutely both in public and
occulte with women, by which means evil suspicion had arisen within and without the monastery. He also frequently furtively abstracted
different things belonging to the monastery.
John de Whitgift frequently gossiped with
Margaret Mortimer and other women in the
church and elsewhere, contrary to his profession
and the honesty of religion. In addition, he
sent alms and other goods of the house to a certain suspected woman.
Robert de Flexburgh was very spiteful and
malicious to his companions, calling them eavesdroppers and liars. He had often been convicted
of incontinence with certain women of the
town, and he sent them alms and other goods of
the house. In spite of the inhibition of the subprior and other members of the convent he had
not desisted from gossiping with suspected women,
publicly and occulte.
Robert de Pontefracto sent presents and many
other goods belonging to the house to a certain
Maye de Pontefracto, owing to which the suspicion of a carnal connexion between them had
arisen. Nicholas de Houghton was a sower of
discord among the brethren. He adhered too
much to, and gossiped with, a certain woman,
with whom he had been convicted and corrected
super lapsu carnis. The following penances were
to be imposed on these monks.
Adam de la Breuer for a whole year was to
bewail his sins imprisoned in a building safe and
remote from the concourse of men, and especially
from the access of women to him. Each Wednesday and Friday he was to be taken to the chapter,
and from every one present he was, in a humble
manner, to receive a discipline, which done, he was
to return to his penance, and on those days was to
have bread, soup, and light ale, and on other
days the ordinary food as served to other monks,
delicacies being, however, excepted.
Brothers Thomas de Hirst, John de Whitgift,
Robert de Flexburgh, for the same period, were
not to go outside the cloister, or in any way to
talk with women, without the special licence
of the abbot or his vicegerent, and then openly
in the presence of two monks. On Wednesdays
and Fridays they were to have only bread, soup
and light ale, and in chapter to receive the
blows of discipline from all the convent.
Among general defects the archbishop found
that the roofs of the conventual church were
very defective and that the latrina of the infirmary was so foul that the evil odour from it was
highly offensive to persons sitting in the cloister.
The year following (fn. 22) the archbishop issued
another set of injunctions, many of them being
the common form of decreta following a visitation. He found the monastery heavily in debt,
and pensions, &c. were not to be granted, except
with consent of the convent, and special licence
of the archbishop. The bursars, cooks, and
other officers were to render yearly accounts to
the abbot or his deputy, and certain of the more
discreet members of the convent. Women were
not to bleach clothes in the churchyard. No
monk was to accept money for his garments,
and the sick were to be properly attended to.
This appears to be the last recorded visitation
of Selby in the Registers, but in a volume in the
Record Office entitled ' Registrum de Tempore
Galfridi de Gaddesby, (fn. 23) Abbatis de Seleby,' there
is a list of questions to be put at a visitation of
Selby in 1343. (fn. 24) These questions are too long
to be quoted in full, but they are very important
in showing that besides the personal inquiries
into matters which might come under the visitor's notice on these occasions, a series of questions had to be formally replied to, very probably
in writing. The questions proposed to the
abbey of Selby on this occasion included
inquiries such as whether the abbot or prior
was circumspect in all matters, whether after
the notice of the visitation or the rumour that
it would be held became known the president
had in any way imposed silence as to any matters,
and whether the conversi as well as the brethren
had been summoned. Then come questions as
to silence, correction of abuses, immorality,
&c. Two questions at the end are of interest:
one is whether all go to confession at least
once a month, and the other whether all receive the Sacrament on the first Sunday in the
month.
In 1380-1 (fn. 25) the abbot was taxed at £9 12s. 1¾d.
and there were twenty-five monks, each taxed at
3s. 4d. (fn. 26)
In 1393 (fn. 27) Pope Boniface IX granted a relaxation of enjoined penance to penitents who
visited and gave alms for the conservation of the
chapel of the Holy Cross in the Benedictine
monastery of Selby.
The Abbots of Selby were from early times
summoned to Parliament. The privilege was
not always appreciated, and when Abbot
Geoffrey de Gaddesby was summoned to the
Parliament of 18 Edward I, he excused himself
personal attendance owing to his feebleness of
body and sent one of his monks, Walter de
Haldenby, with Thomas de Brayton, clerk, to
represent him. (fn. 28)
In the Valor Ecclesiasticus of 1535 (fn. 29) the total
value is set down at £719 2s. 6¼d. Among
the reprises the following alms are mentioned:—
6 quarters of fine grain at 5s. the quarter, and
3 oxen distributed in pieces to the poor, of the
foundation of William the Conqueror, 70s. in
all; money given to poor and indigent strangers
yearly 40s.; money annually given to poor
persons coming within the cloister of the monastery on Maundy Thursday, of the foundation of
William the Conqueror, 40s.; also 50s. similarly
given yearly on the anniversary of Walter
' Skirley,' Bishop of Durham.
In the kitchener's office an heifer or two swine
were given to the poor on the Monday before
Lent and on Maunday Thursday a 'mase ' (fn. 30) of
herrings worth 6s.
The abbey was surrendered on 6 December
1539, and the surrender enrolled on 6 February
following. There were twenty-three monks
besides the abbot, Robert Selby alias Roger (not
Rogers), including Robert Mydley the prior, and
James Laye, Prior of Snaith. Twenty-two
were priests and two were acolytes only. The
abbot received a pension of £100 a year, the
prior £8, the others £6 6s. 8d., £6, or £5 each,
the two acolytes receiving only 53s. 4d. a year.
Abbots of Selby (fn. 31)
Benedict, 1069-97
Hugh de Lacy, 1097-1123
Herbert, 1123-7
Durand, 1127-37 (fn. 32)
(A vacancy of two years)
Walter, 1139-43 (fn. 33)
Helias Paynel, 1143-53
German, 1153-60
Gilbert de Vere, 1160-84
(A vacancy 1184-9)
Roger de London, 1189-95
Richard I (fn. 34) (prior), 1195-1214
Alexander, 1214 (fn. 34a) -21 (fn. 35)
Richard, 1221, (fn. 35a) resigned 1223 (fn. 35b)
Richard (sub-prior of Selby), 1223 (fn. 36)
Hugh de Drayton, 1245, died 1254
Thomas de Whalley, 1254, deprived 1263
David de Cawod, 1263-9
Thomas de Whalley, (fn. 37) restored 1270, deprived
again 1280
William de Aslakeby (prior), 1280, died 1293
John de Wystow I (sub-prior), 1294, resigned 1300
William de Aslaghby (sacrist), 1300, died 1313
Simon de Scardeburg (prior), 1313, died 1321
John de Wystow II, (fn. 38) 1322, died 1335
John de Heslyngton (a monk), 1335, died 1342
Geoffrey de Gaddesby, 1342, died 1368 (fn. 39)
John de Shirburn, 1369, died 1408
William Pigot, 1408, died 1429 (fn. 40)
John Cave, 1429, died 1436
John Ousthorp, 1436, died 1466 (fn. 41)
John Sharrow, 1406, (fn. 41a) died 1486
Lawrence Selby, 1487-1504
Robert Depyng (monk of Crowland), (fn. 42)
1504-18
Thomas Rawlinson, 1518-22
John Barwic, 1522-6
Robert Selby, 1526-40
The nth-century seal (fn. 43) is a vesica, 2¾ in. by
2 in., with a figure of St. German seated and
blessing and holding his crozier. The legend
is:—
SIGILLE SCI GERMANI SELBIENSIS ECLESIE
The counterseal is a Roman gem carved with
the head of the Emperor Honorius and the inscription DN HONORIVS AVG set in a vesica, 1½ in.
by 1 in. having the legend:—
✠ CAPVD NOSTRVM CRISTVS EST
Abbot Richard sealed, c. 1224, with a vesica, (fn. 44)
2¾ in. by 15/8 in., showing St. German seated and
holding his crozier and delivering another crozier
to the abbot who kneels before him. The
legend is:—
✠ RICARD' DEI GRA MINISTER HUM ....
CL'E SBĪ GERMANI DE SELEBI