The Grey Friars in Oxford A. G. Little 1592 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Grey Friars in Oxford
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The Grey Friars in Oxford

Author: A. G. Little

Release date: April 24, 2013 [eBook #42587]
Most recently updated: October 23, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42587

Credits: Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE GREY
FRIARS IN OXFORD ***

GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD

Oxford
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

THE
GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD

PART I
A HISTORY OF THE CONVENT

PART II
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF THE FRIARS

TOGETHER WITH
APPENDICES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS

BY

ANDREW G. LITTLE, M.A.
BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD

Oxford
PRINTED FOR THE OXFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1892
[All rights reserved]

PREFACE.
The object of this work is to give an account of the outward life of the
Franciscans. This might be fairly taken to include the whole activity of the
friars with the exception of their contribution to scholastic philosophy; for
that clearly forms a subject by itself. But even with this limitation the
account here given of the Franciscans’ work does not pretend to be
complete. The documents which remain to us do not by any means cover
the whole of the active life of the Franciscans. While for the thirteenth
century and the Dissolution the records are fairly numerous, the materials
for the intervening period are very scanty. Thus any attempt at a
chronological narrative was out of the question. And the almost total
absence of all Franciscan records (properly so called) in England, has
proved an effectual bar to any completeness of treatment at all. The
arrangement here adopted, both in the choice of subjects and in the relative
prominence given to each of them, is due simply to the exigencies of the
available materials relating to the Oxford Convent. The topographical
information derived from records and other sources has been neither full
enough nor accurate enough to enable me to supply a map or plan of the
property and buildings of the Grey Friars.
A few words will be necessary to explain the plan pursued in Part II. An
endeavour has been made to collect the names of all the Grey Friars who
lived in the Convent at Oxford or who studied in the University: the list, if
complete, would have included all the names which were, or ought to have
been, entered in the ‘Buttery-books’ or ‘Admission-books’ of the house. To
show how far short of this aim the result falls, it is only necessary to point
out that the names of friars actually included in Part II number little more
than three hundred: and the connexion of some of these with Oxford is
doubtful. The bibliographies, appended to the biographical notices, are
intended to include all the extant works of each friar, but not all the MSS.
nor all the editions of each work. Occasionally works are added which have
not been identified, but of whose previous existence there is sufficient
evidence. For this part of the book I have used, besides the well-known
mediaeval bibliographies, a number of catalogues of manuscripts; a list of

these is given below, with the object of showing not so much what has been
done, as what has been left undone.
Among unpublished sources, the most valuable have been various
collections in the Public Record Office, especially the Patent, Close, and
Liberate Rolls; the Registers of Congregation (Reg. A a, G 6, H 7, I 8), the
records of the Chancellor’s Court (Acta Curiae Cancellarii , , EEE, or
), and Brian Twyne’s collections, in the Oxford University Archives.
Further, I have had occasion to consult the Oxford City Archives, some of
the old registers of wills at Somerset House, and various manuscripts in the
British Museum, Lambeth Palace, and Gray’s Inn; the Bodleian and several
College libraries at Oxford; the University (or Public) Library and several
College libraries at Cambridge; the library of Sir Thomas Phillipps at
Thirlestaine House, Cheltenham; the National Library at Paris, and the
Municipal Library at Assisi. I have had no opportunity of examining the
episcopal registers of the diocese of Lincoln, extracts from which, however,
are contained in Twyne’s transcripts.
The Index, so far as it deals with the names of persons and places, will, I
hope, be found complete, with the following limitations. The authorities
quoted, either in the text or in the notes, the places where the manuscripts
cited were written, or were formerly or are now kept, or where the editions
referred to were printed, are not mentioned in the Index, unless there is
some particular reason for including them. So far as it deals with subjects,
the Index is meant to be supplementary to the Table of Contents. The
writings of the friars are not classified in the Index, except those which
come under the headings Aristotle, Bible, Evangelical Poverty and
Sentences.
Finally, I wish to express my thanks to those who have given me aid,
namely, to the Rev. W. G. D. Fletcher, Vicar of St. Michael’s, Shrewsbury,
author of ‘The Black Friars in Oxford,’ who generously placed a valuable
collection of references at my disposal; to Mr. Falconer Madan for
assistance and advice; to the Keeper of the University Archives and the
Town Clerk of Oxford for allowing me free and repeated access to the
documents under their respective charges; and to the authorities in the
various offices and libraries in which I have worked, for their unfailing
courtesy.

ANDREW G. LITTLE.
30 November, 1891.

CATALOGUES OF MANUSCRIPTS
CONSULTED.
For the compilation of the bibliographies in Part II the following catalogues
of manuscripts have been consulted[1]:—
Bernard de Montfaucon, Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum Manuscriptorum;
Paris, 1739, 2 vols. fol.
Haenel, Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum qui in Bibliothecis Galliae,
Helvetiae, Belgii, Britanniae M., Hispaniae, Lusitaniae, asservantur;
Lipsiae, 1830.
Edward Bernard, Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum Angliae et Hiberniae
in unum collecti; Oxon., 1697, 2 vols., fol. Vol. I, Bodleian; Oxford
Colleges; Cambridge Colleges and Public (University) Library. Vol. II,
Cathedral and other libraries in England; Irish libraries.
Catalogues of the following collections in the British Museum:—Royal
MSS. 1734, 4to (Casley); Sloane and Birch, 1782, 2 vols. 4to (Ayscough);
Cotton, 1802, fol.; Harley, 1808-1812, 4 vols., fol.; Lansdowne, 2 parts,
1819, fol.; Arundel and Burney, 1834-40, fol.; Additional MSS. from a. d.
1783-1887.
A Catalogue of the Archiepiscopal MSS. in the Library at Lambeth Palace,
by H. J. Todd; 1812, fol.
Ancient MSS. in Gray’s Inn Library, 1869.
Catalogues of the following collections in the Bodleian:—Laudian MSS.,
1858-1885; Canonician MSS., 1854; Tanner MSS., 1860; Rawlinson, 1862-
1878; Digby, 1883; Catalogue of the Ashmolean MSS., 1845-1866.
Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum qui in Collegiis Aulisque
Oxoniensibus hodie adservantur (Coxe); Oxon., 1852, 2 vols., 4to.

A Catalogue of the Manuscripts preserved in the Library of the University
of Cambridge, edited for the Syndics of the University Press; Cambridge,
1856, &c., 6 vols., 8vo.
Nasmith, Catalogue of the Parker MSS. in Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge; 1787, 4to.
Catalogue of MSS. in the library of Gonville and Caius, by J. J. Smith;
1849, 4to.
Catalogus Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae Parisiensis; Paris, 1739-
1744, 4 vols., fol.
Inventaire des Manuscrits conservés à la Bibliothèque Impériale sous les
Nos. 8823-18613, du Fonds Latin et faisant suite à la série dont le
Catalogue a été publié en 1744 par Léopold Delisle; Paris, 1863, &c., 8vo.
Inventaire des MSS. de la Bibliothèque Nationale, Fonds de Cluni, par L.
Delisle.
Catalogue général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques des
Départements; Paris, 1849-1885, 7 vols., 4to.
Catalogue général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques de France;
(α) Paris: (1) Bibliothèque Mazarine, by A. Molinier, 3 vols. 8vo.; (2)
Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, by H. Martin, 1885, &c. (vols. 1 and 2 contain
the Latin MSS.). (β) Départements, vols. 1-12, 1886-1889.
Catalogue des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Publique de Bruges (P. J.
Laude), Bruges, 1859, 8vo.
Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae Monacensis,
Cod. Lat. vols. 1 and 2[2]; Monachii 1868-1874.
Katalog der Handschriften der königl. öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden;
Leipzig, 1882-3, 2 vols., 8vo.
Tabulae Codicum Manuscriptorum praeter Graecos et Orientales in
Bibliotheca Palatina Vindobonensi asservatorum; Vienna, 1864-1875, 7
vols., 8vo. (Codices 1-14,000).

Catalogus Codicum Latinorum Bibliothecae Mediceae Laurentianae
(Bandini), 1774, 5 vols., folio.
Bibliotheca Leopoldina Laurentiana (Bandini); Florence, 1791, 3 vols.,
folio.
Bibliotheca Manuscripta ad S. Marci Venetiarum (Valentinelli); Venet.
1868-1873, 6 vols., 8vo.
Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Codices Palatini Latini, tom. I, codices 1-
921; 1886.
Bibliothecae Patavinae Manuscriptae publicae et privatae opera Jacobi
Philippi Tomasini; Utini, 1639, 4to. (Tomasin).
Bibliothecae Venetae Manuscriptae publicae et privatae opera Jacobi
Philippi Tomasini; Utini, 1650, 4to. (Tomasin).

ABBREVIATIONS AND EDITIONS USED.
Anal. Franc. = Analacta Franciscana, sive chronica aliaque varia documenta
ad historiam Fratrum Minorum spectantia, edita a Patribus Collegii S.
Bonaventurae, Quaracchi, 1885-7, 2 vols.
Archiv f. L. u. K. Gesch. = Archiv für Literatur- und Kirchengeschichte des
Mittelalters, herausgegeben von H. Denifle und F. Ehrle.
Bale, Script. = Illustrium Majoris Britanniae Scriptorum ... Summarium,
1559, 2 vols.
B. of Pisa = Bartholomew of Pisa, Liber Conformitatum, ed. Milan, 1510.
Bernard = Catalogi Librorum MSS. Angliae et Hiberniae, Oxon., 1697.
Burnet, Reformation = History of the Reformation of the Church of
England, Oxford, 1829.
Foxe = The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe, edited by Cattley, 1841.
Hist. Litt. = Histoire Littéraire de la France (by the Benedictines of St.
Maur, and the Members of the Institute), 1733-1873.
Lyte = Maxwell Lyte, History of the University of Oxford, 1886.
Montfaucon = B. Montfaucon, Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum MSS., &c.
P.C.C. = Prerogative Court of Canterbury, Wills proved in the, now at
Somerset House.
Q. R. Misc. = Queen’s Remembrancer, Miscellaneous Accounts, now in the
Public Record Office.
Q. R. Wardrobe = Queen’s Remembrancer, Wardrobe Accounts, now in the
Public Record Office.
R.O. = Public Record Office.

R.S. = Rolls Series, or Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and
Ireland during the Middle Ages, published under the direction of the
Master of the Rolls.
Tomasin = Bibliotheca Patavinae MSS., and Bibliothecae Venetae MSS.
&c. (see above).
Wadding = L. Wadding, Annales Minorum, Romae, 1731, &c.
Wadding, Script. = L. Wadding, Scriptores Ordinis Minorum, Romae, 1806.
Wadding, Sup. ad Script. = Supplementum et castigatio ad Scriptores trium
Ordinum S. Francisci a Waddingo aliisve descriptos ... opus
posthumum Fr. Jo. Hyacinthi Sbaraleae, Romae, 1806.
Wood-Clark = Survey of the Antiquities of the City of Oxford, by Anthony
Wood, edited by Andrew Clark, 1889-1890. [The MS. from which this
edition is printed is often referred to in the following pages, namely
‘Wood MS. F. 29 a’ in the Bodleian.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE

PART I. HISTORY OF THE CONVENT.
CHAPTER I. EARLY YEARS.
Arrival and first settlement of the Franciscan Friars at
Oxford 1
Their early poverty and cheerfulness 3
Oxford Friars as peacemakers and Crusaders 7
Relations to the University and to the earliest Colleges 8
Their strict observance of the Rule 10

CHAPTER II. PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS.
First settlement of the Friars was within the City Wall 12
They acquire the houses of William, son of Richard de
Wileford (1229), and Robert, son of Robert Oen 13
Increase of the area in 1244-1245 14
Grants from the King, Thomas de Valeynes, and others 15
The island in the Thames, 1245 16
Messuage of Laurence Wych, Mayor of Oxford, 1246 17
Friars of the Sack settle in Oxford 17
Their property granted to the Minorites by Boniface
VIII, Clement V, and Edward II, 1310 18
Grants from various persons, 1310 19
Inquisitiones ad quod Damnum, concerning properties
belonging to Richard Cary and John Culvard, 1319 19
Grants by Walter Morton (1321) and John de Grey de
Rotherfield (1337) 20

To what classes did the donors belong? 20
Buildings of the Grey Friars, absence of information
about 21
Original houses and chapel 21
School built by Agnellus 21
The stricter Friars oppose the tendency to build 22
Building of the new Church of St. Francis 22
Its site and appearance 23
William of Worcester’s description of it 24
Monuments and tombs in the Church 24
Grave of Roger Bacon 26
Cloisters, Chapter-house, Refectory, and other buildings 27
Conduit and Gates 28

CHAPTER III. FRANCISCAN SCHOOLS AT
OXFORD.
Learning necessary to the Friars 29
The first readers or lectors to the Franciscans at Oxford 30
Nature of the office of lector, as understood by Grostete
and Adam Marsh 31
The lector and his socius 33
Later lectors were ordinary Regent Masters in Theology 34
Appointment to the office of lector 34
Special regulations concerning the lectors 36
System of instruction in theology recommended by
Grostete 36
Lectures by the Friars 37
Controversy with the University about theological
degrees in 1253 38

Controversy between the University and the
Dominicans 39
Study of Arts (philosophy) before Theology, insisted on
by the University 41
Roger Bacon on the need for some preliminary training
for the Friars 42
Extortion of graces by external influence; ‘wax-doctors’ 42
Career of a student Minorite 43
On the numbers of Friars sent to Oxford 43
Course of study before ‘opposition’ 44
‘Opposition’ and ‘Responsion’ 45
The degree of Bachelor of Divinity 46
Exercises before ‘Inception’ 47
‘Vesperies’ and Inception 48
Questions disputed on these occasions in the thirteenth
century 49
How far were the statutable requirements as to the
period of study really carried out? 49
Expenses at Inception 50
Necessary Regency 52
Conditions on which dispensations were granted 52
Maintenance of Franciscan students at the University 53
What proportion took degrees 54
Relative numbers of the various Religious Orders at
Oxford 54

CHAPTER IV. BOOKS AND LIBRARIES.
Absence of privacy in a Franciscan Friary 55
Books of individual Friars 56
The two libraries, and their contents 57

Grostete’s bequest of books 57
Extant MSS. formerly in the Franciscan Convent 59
Alleged illegal detention of books by the Friars in 1330 60
Richard Fitzralph’s statements 60
Richard of Bury, on the libraries of Mendicant Friars 61
Dispersion of the books of the Oxford Franciscans 61
Leland’s description of the library in his time 62

CHAPTER V. PLACE OF OXFORD IN THE
FRANCISCAN ORGANIZATION.
Learned Friars as practical workers among the people 63
Their Sermons 64
Educational organization throughout the country 64
Relations of the Franciscan School at Oxford to the
other Franciscan Schools of Europe 66
English Franciscans teach in foreign Universities 67
Oxford as the head convent of a custodia 68
Provincial Chapters held at Oxford 69

CHAPTER VI. RIVALRY BETWEEN THE ORDERS:
ATTACKS ON THE FRIARS.
Rivalry between the Friars Preachers and Minors:
proselytism 71
Politics and Philosophy 72
Peckham and the Oxford Friars 73
Evangelical Poverty 75
Contrast between theory and practice 78
Attack on the Friars by Richard Fitzralph 79
Charge of stealing children 79

Wiclif’s early relations to the Friars 81
His attack on them in his later years 82
Charges of gross immorality made not by Wiclif, but by
his followers 83
The University and the Friars; summary of events in
1382 84
Unpopularity of the Friars in the fifteenth century 85
Foreign Minorites expelled from Oxford 86
Conspiracies against Henry IV; part taken by the Oxford
Franciscans 87
Relations between the Conventual and Observant
Franciscans 87

CHAPTER VII. ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE FRIARS’
MANNER OF LIFE AND MEANS OF LIVELIHOOD:
BENEFACTORS.
On the loss of Franciscan Records 89
Mendicancy as a means of livelihood 91
Procurators and limitors 92
Career of Friar Brian Sandon, legal syndicus of the
Oxford Friary in the sixteenth century 93
Charges of immorality against the Friars 94
Their worldly manner of life before the Dissolution 96
Poverty of the Convent 97
Sources of income 97
Annual grants from the King and others 97
Frequency of bequests to the Friars 100
List of benefactors 102
Some other sources of income 110
Classes from which the Friars were drawn 111

Motives which led men to enter the Order 111

CHAPTER VIII. THE DISSOLUTION.
Attitude of the Grey Friars towards the Reformation in
its intellectual, religious, and political aspects 112
The Royal Divorce 114
Visitation of Oxford University in 1535 116
Suppression of the Friaries in 1538 116
Condition of the Grey Friary 117
Expulsion of the Friars; their subsequent history; Simon
Ludford 119
Houses and site of the Grey Friars 120
Dr. London tries to secure the land for the town 121
Lease and sale of the property 121
Notes on its subsequent history 123
Total destruction of the buildings 124

PART II. BIOGRAPHICAL AND
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF INDIVIDUAL
FRIARS.
CHAPTER I.
125-
Custodians and Wardens
133

CHAPTER II.
134-
Lectors or Regent Masters of the Franciscans
175

CHAPTER III.

Franciscans who studied in the Convent at Oxford, or
had some other connexion with the Town or the 176-
University 294

APPENDICES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS.
A. Documents relating to the acquisition of land
property by the Grey Friars.
1. Grant of a house by William, son of Richard de
Wileford 295
2. Grant of a house by Robert, son of Robert Oen,
1236 296
3. Royal license to enclose their possessions and throw
down part of the old City Wall, 1244 296
4. Island in the Thames acquired by Henry III, 1245 297
5. Grant of the same island to the Friars, 1245 297
6. Grant of two messuages by Thomas de Valeynes,
1245 298
7. Grant of a messuage by Laurence Wych, Mayor of
Oxford, 1246 299
8. License to enclose their new possessions; the City
Wall to be repaired, 1248 299
9. Royal grants to the Friars of the Sack, 1262, 1265 300
10. Grants to the Friars Minors from various persons,
1310 301
11. Property of the Friars of the Sack conferred on the
Friars Minors, 1310 301
12. Re-grant of the same property to them, 1319 302
13. Inquiry held at Oxford in 1319 as to the advisability
of allowing John Culvard to grant a parcel of
ground to the Friars Minors 303
14. Grant of a parcel of ground by John de Grey de
Rotherfield 305

B. Miscellaneous Documents.
1. Food for the Friars Minors and others, 1244 307
2. Adam Marsh as royal nuncius, 1247 307
3. For the same, 1257 308
4. The Church of the Minorites used as a Sanctuary,
1284-5 308
5. Royal grant of 50 marcs, 1289 308
6. Decree of the General Chapter at Paris, 1292 309
7. Royal grant of 50 marcs, 1323 309
8. ‘Receptor Denariorum’ of the Grey Friars, 1341 310
9. Goods and chattels of Friar John Welle, S.T.P., 1378 311
10. Expulsion of foreign Minorites, 1388 312
11. William Woodford; confirmation of his privileges
by Boniface IX, 1396 312
12. Appointment of a lecturer to the Convent at
Hereford, c. 1400 313
13. Decree of the General Chapter at Florence, 1467 314
14. Recovery of debt from a Sheriff, 1488 315
15. Documents relating to the lease of a garden at the
Grey Friars to Richard Leke, 1513-1514 316
16. Extracts from the Will of Richard Leke, 1526 318
17. An ex-warden called to account, 1529 318

C. Controversy between the Friars Preachers and
Friars Minors at Oxford, 1269 320

D. Supplications and Graces from the Registers of
Congregation.
John David, 1450/1, 1454/5 336

John Sunday, 1453/4 336
Richard Ednam, 1462, 1463 336
Walter Goodfeld, 1506-1510 337
John Thornall, 1525 338
Thomas Kirkham, 1527 338

INDEX 341

CORRIGENDA.
P. 6, n. 5, for tempora, read temporalem.
P. 33. There was no house of Grey Friars at
Evesham. Simon de Montfort was buried by
the monks of Evesham (see Rishanger). The
Miracula Symonis de Montfort, however,
bears evident traces of Franciscan influence.
P. 49, n. 3, for Church, Quarterly Review,
read Church Quarterly Review.
P. 54, l. 11, for because, read became.
P. 56, n. 5 for quos, read quas.

THE GREY FRIARS IN OXFORD.

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

CHAPTER I.

EARLY YEARS.
Arrival of the Franciscans at Oxford.—Their
early Poverty, and Cheerfulness.—
Oxford Friars as Peacemakers, and
Crusaders.—Relations to the University,
and to the first Colleges.—Their strict
observance of the Rule.
The Franciscans first arrived in England in 1224[3]. On Tuesday, the 10th of
September in that year (to follow the account of Friar Thomas Eccleston,
the earliest historian of the Order in this country), a company of nine friars,
four of them clerks and five laymen, landed at Dover, under the leadership
of Agnellus of Pisa, the first Provincial Minister. After staying two days at
Canterbury, four of them proceeded to London; and at the end of the month,
two of these, Friar Richard of Ingeworth and Friar Richard of Devon, set
out for Oxford. It is perhaps to this place that the well-known story told by
Bartholomew of Pisa properly belongs[4]. As they neared Oxford they were
stopped by the floods, and finding themselves at nightfall ‘in a vast wood
which lies between Bath and Oxford,’ they sought refuge ‘for the love of
God’ at a grange belonging to the monks of Abingdon, ‘lest they should
perish from hunger or the wild beasts in the forest.’ The prior, judging them
to be jesters[5], had them turned out; but a young monk, when the rest had
gone to bed, put them into a hayloft and brought them bread and beer. That
night he had a dream. The prior and his brethren were summoned before the
judgment-seat of Christ; and
‘there came a certain poor man, humble and despised, in the habit of those
poor friars, and he cried with a loud voice: “O most impartial Judge, the
blood of my brethren, which hath been shed this night, crieth unto Thee.
The guardians of this place have refused them meat and lodging, although
they have left all for Thy sake, and were now coming here to seek those
souls which Thou hast redeemed with Thy blood; they would not, in fact,

have refused as much to jesters and mummers.”... Then the Judge
commanded them to be hanged on the elm that stood in that cloister.’
In the morning the young monk found his companions dead, and became an
early convert to the order of St. Francis.
On their arrival at Oxford, the two friars were received with great kindness
by the Dominicans.
‘They ate in their refectory, and slept in their dormitory, like conventuals for
eight days[6].’
They then hired a house in the parish of St. Ebbe from Robert le Mercer[7].
Alms sufficient for the purpose were probably already forthcoming, as the
new Order did not have to wait long for recognition. Though they only
occupied this house till the following summer[8], they were there joined by
‘many honest bachelors and many eminent men’[9]; and it may have been
owing to this increase in their numbers that they left their first abode in
1225 and hired a house with ground attached from Richard the Miller[10]. It
is significant of the rapid growth of opinion in their favour that Richard
‘within a year conferred the land and house on the community of the town
for the use of the Friars Minors.’
Enthusiasm and self-sacrifice were the powerful agents which ensured
success and favour to the early Franciscans, and many are the stories of
their primitive poverty and its effects; and if the convent at Oxford was not
especially distinguished like that at Cambridge by ‘paucilitas pecuniae,’ or
like that at York by ‘zelus paupertatis[11],’ the Oxford Minorites, during the
time of Agnellus at least, departed but little from the ideal of their
founder[12], and lived the life of the poor among whom they ministered. The
pangs of hunger were not unknown in the convent; and on one occasion the
friars were in debt to the amount of ten marks for food[13]. Their first houses
were mean and small—too small for the numbers who flocked to their
Order[14]; and the infirmary was
‘so low that the height of the walls did not much exceed the height of a
man[15].’

When at length they built their church, the brethren worked with their own
hands, and a bishop and an abbat who had assumed the coarse habit of the
friars are said to have ‘carried water and sand and stones for the building of
the place[16].’
The appearance of the Minorites was no less humble than their buildings.
Their habits of coarse gray or brown cloth[17], tied round the waist with a
cord, often worn and patched, as Grostete loved to see them, hardly[18]
distinguished them from ‘simple rustics[19].’ In the convent at Oxford,
pillows were forbidden, and the use of shoes was permitted only to the
infirm or old, and that by special licence[20]. We hear of two of the brethren
returning from a chapter held at Oxford at Christmas time singing as they
‘picked their way along the rugged path over the frozen mud and rigid
snow, whilst the blood lay in the track of their naked feet, without their
being conscious of it[21].’
Even from the robbers and murderers who infested the woods near Oxford
the Barefoot Friars were safe[22].
‘Three things,’ said Friar Albert, Minister General, ‘tended to the exaltation
of the Order,—bare feet, coarse garments, and the rejecting of money[23]’;
and the Oxford Franciscans were as zealous in the last respect as in the
other two. The Archdeacon of Northampton sent a bag of money to Friar
Adam Marsh, and when the latter refused it, the messenger threw it down in
the cell and left it:—
‘Wherefore,’ writes Adam to the Archdeacon, ‘the bearer of these presents
has at the instance of the brethren taken the said money, just as it was,
sealed with your seal, to your lordship, to dispose of according to your
pleasure[24].’
The evidence of the Public Records, containing scattered notices of grants
from the Crown, is striking on this point, and the poverty of these early
Franciscans can hardly be better illustrated than by the means taken to
relieve it. During the long reign of Henry III, the Patent, Close, and Liberate
Rolls contain only three grants of money to the house of the Minorites at
Oxford, and all of them are due to exceptional circumstances. They are, ten
marks for the support of a provincial chapter in 1238, 60s. for their houses

in 1245 in lieu of six oaks which the king had before given them, and three
marks for the fabric of their church in 1246[25]. The alms to the house at
Oxford are almost wholly in kind, and consist chiefly of supplies of
firewood from the royal forests round Oxford. The earliest recorded
instance of royal bounty was a grant of thirteen oaks in ‘Brehull’ (Brill)
forest for fuel on the 9th Jan. 1231[26]. A few years later they received
fifteen cartloads of brushwood from Shotover forest[27], and in 1237 fifteen
oaks in Wychwood Forest ‘to make charcoal[28].’ Similar notices occur
almost every year—sometimes twice a year—throughout the reign of Henry
III[29]. In 1240 the keepers of the wines at Southampton were ordered to
deliver one cask of Gascon wine, of the king’s bounty, to the Friars Minors
at Oxford ‘to celebrate masses[30].’ In 1248 the Sheriff of Oxford received
orders to
‘give to the Friars Minors of Oxford one cask of wine of the six casks
which he took into the king’s hand of the wine of those who lately killed a
clerk in the town of Oxford[31].’
But a fortnight later the king repented of his generosity and assigned the
same cask to one of his numerous relatives[32]. Of more interest, as showing
that the friars were really classed with the poor of the town, is a royal brief
of the 12th of Dec. 1244 to the bailiffs of Oxford, bidding them
‘give of the ferm of their town to Friar Roger, King’s Almoner, on
Wednesday the morrow of the feast of St. Lucy the Virgin, ten marks, to
feed a thousand paupers and the Friars Preachers and Minors of Oxford, for
the soul of the Lady Empress sister of the King, on the day of her
anniversary[33].’
With all their poverty and holiness they were singularly free from that form
of piety which consists in wearing a sad countenance and appearing unto
men to fast. We hear indeed of strict silence, of constant prayer, of vigils
that lasted the whole night[34].
‘Yet,’ continues Eccleston[35], ‘the brethren were so full of fun among
themselves, that a mute could hardly refrain from laughter at the sight. So
when the young friars of Oxford laughed too frequently, it was enjoined on
one that as often as he laughed he should be punished. Now it happened
that, when he had received no punishments in one day, and yet could not

restrain himself from laughing, he had a vision one night, that the whole
convent stood as usual in the choir, and the friars were beginning to laugh
as usual, and behold the crucifix which stood at the door of the choir turned
towards them as though alive, and said: “They are the sons of Corah who in
the hour of chanting laugh and sleep.”... On hearing this dream, the friars
were frightened and behaved without very noticeable laughter[36].’
Grostete said to a Friar Preacher, ‘Three things are necessary to temporal
health—to eat, sleep, and be merry[37].’ Excessive austerity was
discountenanced by the authorities of the Oxford convent. Friar Albert of
Pisa, who was himself ‘always cheerful and merry in the society of the
brethren[38],’ compelled Friar Eustace de Merc, contrary to custom, to eat
fish, saying that the Order lost many good persons through their
indiscretion[39]. Grostete again
‘commanded a melancholy friar to drink a cup full of the best wine as a
penance, and when he had drunk it up, though most unwillingly, he said to
him, “Dear brother, if you often performed a penance like that, you would
have a better ordered conscience[40].”’
The friars lovingly treasured up the great bishop’s puns and jokes and wise
sayings[41], and were always ready to tell or appreciate a good story. From
first to last they had the reputation of being excellent company[42], and were
welcome at the tables of the rich or well-to-do[43]. They were allowed by
the rule to
‘eat of all manner of meats which be set before them[44],’
a practice which occasionally caused some scandal[45]; and Friar Albert of
Pisa ordered them to keep silence in the house of hosts, except among the
preachers and friars of other provinces[46]. Like St. Francis himself, the
Oxford friars often possessed the courtesy and charm of manner which is
born of sympathy[47]; and it was perhaps to this quality that their
employment as diplomatic agents is to be attributed. Thus Agnellus was
chosen in 1233 to negotiate with the rebellious Earl Marshall and try to
bring him back to his allegiance[48]. Adam Marsh was on more than one
occasion sent beyond the sea as royal emissary[49], and Edward I sent
Oxford Minorites to treat for peace with his enemies[50]. But to the
mediaeval mind, there was a cause more sacred than that of peace or good

government; and the Franciscans would not have had their great influence
—would not have become leaders of men throughout the world—had they
not shared the one ideal, which still even in the thirteenth century appealed
to every class in every country of Europe. The Crusades attracted the
scholastic philosopher no less than the baron with his sins to expiate, or the
serf with his liberty to win. It was partly to increase his influence as a
missionary[51] that Adam of Oxford, one of the first ‘masters’ who joined
the Order[52], took the vows of St. Francis; against the wishes of his
brethren in England, who hoped to keep among them so famous and learned
a convert, and who indeed feared lest he should come under heretical
influences[53], he went to Gregory IX, and at his own prayer was sent by the
Pope to preach to the Saracens[54]. When Prince Edward went to the Holy
Land in 1270, he took with him as preacher Friar William de Hedley, the
lecturer and regent master of the Friars Minors at Oxford[55]. Hedley died
before the army reached Acre; but these learned friars did not flinch when
summoned to meet a sterner fate. In 1289 Tripoli was captured by the
Saracens: an English friar led the last charge of the despairing Christians,
carrying aloft the cross till his arms were hewn off;
‘the above-mentioned friar,’ continues the chronicler, ‘who by his example
provoked very many to martyrdom, had been no small space of time warden
of the Oxford Convent[56].’
The friars of both Orders soon took a leading part in the affairs of the
University. As Bishop of Lincoln[57], Grostete continued to exercise a kind
of paternal authority over the University[58], and his high character and long
connexion with Oxford gave him an influence which was denied to his
successors. It was natural that this influence should be reflected on the
Franciscans, whom he had taken under his especial care and among whom
was his ‘true friend and faithful counsellor[59]’ Adam Marsh. The latter was
specially summoned to the congregation to hear and advise on the answer
sent by Grostete to some petitions of the University[60], and we find him
interceding with the Bishop on behalf of the Chancellor, Radulph of
Sempringham[61]. One of the most important stages in the constitutional
development of the University is marked by the charter of Henry III in
1244, which constituted a special tribunal for the scholars, and formed the
basis of the Chancellor’s jurisdiction. On the 11th of May of the same year,
a deed of acknowledgment was executed at Reading and signed and sealed

on behalf of the University by the Prior of the Friars Preachers, the Minister
of the Friars Minors, the Chancellor of the University, the Archdeacons of
Lincoln and Cornwall, and Friar Robert Bacon[62]. Edward I in 1275[63]
appointed ‘Friars John de Pecham and Oliver de Encourt’ royal
commissioners to decide a suit between Master Robert de Flemengvill[64]
and a Jewess named Countess, the wife of Isaac Pulet, which had long been
pending in the Chancellor’s court; this however was not to be treated as a
precedent to the prejudice of the Chancellor’s jurisdiction.
It is probable that the example afforded by the houses of student friars was
not lost on the founders of the early colleges. We know that Walter de
Merton was a friend of Adam Marsh[65], and a benefactor of the friars, but it
would be dangerous to attempt to trace any direct Franciscan influence in
the statutes of his college[66]. There is however no doubt about the
connexion of the Franciscans with the foundation of Balliol College. Sir
John de Balliol died in 1269 without having established his house for poor
scholars on a permanent footing. His widow Devorguila first gave them a
definite organisation in 1282. According to an old tradition[67], she was
induced to take this step by her Franciscan confessor, Friar Richard de
Slikeburne. It is clear that the latter was her most trusted and energetic
agent in carrying out the plan. Devorguila urges him by all means in his
power to promote the perpetuation of ‘our house of Balliol[68],’ and the
executors of Sir John de Balliol assigned certain moneys to the scholars of
the house
‘with the consent of Devorguila and at the advice of Friar Richard de
Slikeburne[69].’
Nor was the connexion merely a transitory one. The statutes of 1282[70] are
addressed to Friar Hugh de Hertilpoll and Master William de Menyl, who
are evidently the two ‘proctors’ mentioned in the document. To the proctors
(who did not belong to the house but were in the position of permanent
visitors) was entrusted the institution of the principal after his election by
the scholars, together with a general supervision over the economy of the
college. They alone could expel a refractory scholar, and they were
constituted the special guardians of the poorer students[71]. Nothing remains
to show how long the first proctors held their office, or how their successors
were appointed. It is probable however that the office was intended to be a

perpetual one[72]—not a temporary expedient to be called into existence
from time to time,—and further that one of the proctors was always a
Franciscan. Two other documents bearing on the subject are known to exist.
In 1325 a doubt had arisen whether the members of the college might study
any science except the liberal arts; it was declared to be unlawful to do so
and contrary to the mind of the founder, and was consequently forbidden
‘by Masters Robert of Leicester, of the Order of Friars Minors, S.T.P., and
Nicholas de Tyngewick, M.D. and S.T.B., then Magistri Extranei of the said
House[73].’
The second document[74] is a letter dated 1433 addressed to the Bishop of
London by
‘Richard Roderham, S.T.P., and John Feckyngtone of the order of Minorites
in Oxford, Rectors of Balliol College.’
The Rectors having, ‘according to the exigency of the office which we
discharge upon the rule of the said college and the observance of the
statutes thereof,’ inquired into the working of the first statute, decided, with
the consent of the majority of the house, that it was prejudicial to the
college, and asked the Bishop to consent to the modification of it[75].
It will be readily admitted that in the thirteenth century the Oxford
Franciscans deserved their high reputation. It is true, that frequent
complaints are heard of the decline of the Order[76]—that many relaxations
had been introduced into the Rule. But these were not demanded by the
English province. When Haymo was General, orders were issued by the
Chapter that friars should be elected in each province to note any points in
the Rule which seemed to require revision, and send them to the Minister
General. Eccleston[77] gives the names of three friars elected for this
purpose in England—Adam Marsh, the foremost of the Oxford friars; Peter
of Tewkesbury, Custodian of Oxford; and Henry de Burford.
‘Having marked some articles, the said friars sent them to the General, in a
schedule without a seal, beseeching him, by the sprinkling of the blood of
Jesus Christ, to let the Rule stand, as it was handed down by St. Francis, at
the dictation of the Holy Spirit[78].’

CHAPTER II.

PROPERTY AND BUILDINGS.
First Settlement inside the City Wall.—
Acquisition of the houses of W. de
Wileford (1229) and Robert Oen (1236).
—Increase of the area in 1244-1245.—
Grants from the King, Thomas
Valeynes, and others.—Island in the
Thames, 1245.—Messuage of Laurence
Wych, 1247.—Friars of the Penitence of
Jesus Christ.—Their property in Oxford
granted to the Minorites by Clement V,
and by Edward II, 1310.—Grants from
various persons, 1310.—Richard Cary
and John Culvard, 1319.—Walter
Morton, 1321.—To what classes did the
donors belong?
Absence of information about the buildings
at the Grey Friars.—Original houses and
chapel.—School built by Agnellus.—
The stricter friars oppose the tendency
to build, without success.—Building of
the new church, 1246, &c.—Its site and
appearance.—William of Worcester’s
description of it.—Richard Plantagenet,
Earl of Cornwall, buried there, 1272.—
Other tombs in the church, especially
that of Agnellus.—Grave of Roger
Bacon.—Cloisters, Chapter House,
Refectory, and other conventual
buildings.—Conduit and Gates.

For about a hundred years from the date of their settlement in Oxford, the
Friars Minors were gradually acquiring property. We have seen that after a
short sojourn in the house of Robert le Mercer, the house of Richard le
Muliner became their first permanent abode. The position of the former
cannot be at all definitely ascertained; it was in the parish of St. Ebbe’s[79],
probably near the church and within the city walls[80]. Wood places it
between the church and the Watergate. But he is certainly wrong in the
position he ascribes to the second house, namely,
‘without the towne wall, and about a stone’s cast from their first hired
house[81].’
The house of Richard the Miller was undoubtedly between the wall and
Freren Street (Church Street). In 1244 Henry III allowed the friars to throw
down the wall of the town in order to ‘connect their new place with the old
one[82].’ Even apart from the fact that the Mercer’s house did not at this
time belong to them, it is obvious that the houses which they acquired in
1224 and 1225 would not in 1244 be distinguished as the ‘old place’ and the
‘new place’ respectively. The ‘new place’ refers to lands which came into
their possession about the time of this grant, and of which Wood knew
nothing, while the Miller’s house formed part of the ‘old place.’
In fact, several years elapsed before the friars obtained property outside the
city wall, their first efforts being directed to secure the land between the
wall and Freren Street. It was not long before their cramped area was
enlarged. In the Mayoralty of John Pady[83] the citizens of Oxford
subscribed[84] forty-three marks sterling to buy from William, son of
Richard de Wileford, his house in St. Ebbe’s, with all its appurtenances, ‘to
house the Friars Minors for ever,’ the said good men of Oxford giving to
William one pound of cummin annually in lieu of all service[85]. The next
grant of which we find mention seems also to have been an act of
municipal, rather than of private, charity. In 1236[86] Robert, son of Robert
Oen, had given them a house adjoining their land, on condition that he,
‘having been a free tenant of the prior and brethren of St. John of Jerusalem
in England in the aforesaid place,’
should have the same privilege attaching to his new house in the parish of
St. Michael at the North Gate. This house of Robert Oen’s in St. Ebbe’s was

one of the ‘mural mansions,’ on the occupiers of which the duty of repairing
the city wall fell[87]. The obligation, however, was now, when the house
came into the hands of the friars, willingly undertaken with the King’s
assent by the Mayor and good men of Oxford.
Under the ministry of Agnellus any tendency to accumulate property was
rigorously suppressed[88], nor does his successor Albert appear to have been
more lenient[89]. But under Haymo of Faversham (1238-9) and William of
Nottingham (1239-51) a different spirit began to prevail, and one far less in
accordance with the original idea of the Order. Haymo
‘preferred that the friars should have ample areas and should cultivate them,
that they might have the fruits of the earth at home, rather than beg them
from others[90].’
And under William of Nottingham the Oxford house gained a large increase
of territory[91].
It was in 1245 that this took place, and a remarkably full series of records
relating to the event is still extant. By a deed dated 22nd December,
1244[92], the King gave the Friars Minors permission,
‘for the greater quiet and security of their habitation, to inclose the street
which extends under the wall of Oxford, from the gate which is called
Watergate[93] in the parish of St. Ebbe, up to the postern in the same wall
towards the Castle; so that a crenellated wall like the rest of the wall of the
same town be made round the foresaid dwelling, beginning from the west
side of Watergate, and reaching southwards as far as the bank of the
Thames, and extending along the bank westwards as far as the fee of the
Abbat of Bec in the parish of St. Bodhoc, and then turning again northwards
till it joins the old wall of the foresaid borough on the east side of the small
postern;’
and they were further allowed to throw down the old wall which stretched
across their habitation. But in 1248[94] this grant, as far as it related to the
wall, was cancelled; the old wall was to be repaired, and the proposed new
wall was not mentioned.
There can be little doubt that in December, 1244, the friars did not possess
the land which they were then allowed to enclose; it is indeed very doubtful

whether they had any property south of the wall. Possibly they may have
acquired already the place which they held in 1278,
‘of the gift of Agnes widow of Guydo[95], which the said Agnes had by
descent from her predecessors, and they pay thence to Walter Goldsmith
one pound of cummin[96].’
The value was then unknown, nor is the position specified[97]. It was,
however, no doubt situated in the suburb of St. Ebbe’s parish. Two other
plots of ground are mentioned in the same document as belonging to the
Friars: of one of these (that granted by Thomas Walonges) we have accurate
information, and shall mention it in its due place. Of the other nothing
further is known than that they held it by grant from Master Richard de
Mepham. But the grant was probably of later date than 1244. Richard was
Archdeacon of Oxford in 1263, became Dean of Lincoln in 1273, and
probably died in 1274 at the council of Lyons[98].
But the royal grant in the Patent Roll of 29 Henry III is explained by the
fact that the Franciscans, or rather their benefactors, were already
negotiating for the transfer of a large part of the property there described, if
not of the whole of it.
In February, 1245, Thomas Valeynes, or Valoignes (or Walonges as he is
called in the Inquisition of 6 & 7 Edward I), carried into effect a plan for the
benefit of the Friars Minors which it must have taken long to bring to a
successful conclusion[99]. It consisted in begging or buying out a number of
holders of property in the south-west ‘suburb of Oxford,’ and granting in
one case at least tenements in another part of the town as compensation.
Thus, in exchange for two messuages with their appurtenances on the
south-west of the town, Symon son of Benedict and Leticia his wife,
received one messuage outside the North Gate, together with a building
then held by Hugh Marshall,
‘which same messuage and building were formerly held by Benedictus le
Mercer father of the foresaid Symon.’
One messuage with appurtenances was acquired from John Costard and
Margery his wife, two from Warin of Dorchester and Juliana his wife, one
from William ‘le Barbeur’ and Alice his wife, one from Henry ‘le Teler’ and

Alice his wife, and a little later[100] one curtilage ‘in the suburb of Oxford in
the parish of St. Budoc,’ from John Aylmer and Christiana his wife. All
these eight tenements Thomas de Valeynes, ‘at the petition’ of the former
owners, assigned
‘to the increase of the area in which the Friars Minors dwelling at Oxford
are lodged in pure and perpetual alms free and quit of all secular service
and exaction for ever;’
and we may reasonably conclude that they filled the space from the City
Wall on the north to Trill Mill Stream on the south, and from Littlegate
Street on the east to a line drawn from the ‘fee of the Abbat of Bec in the
parish of St. Bodhoc’s’ to the West Gate on the west[101].
Shortly after this, namely, on the 22nd of April, 1245[102], Henry III gave
the Friars, to enlarge their new area,
‘our island in the Thames, which we have bought from Henry son of Henry
Simeon,’
with permission to make a bridge over the arm of the river dividing it from
their houses, and to enclose it with a wall, or in any other way which would
insure ‘the security of their houses and the tranquillity of their religion,’ On
the same day[103] the King ordered the Barons of the Exchequer to deduct
from the fine of sixty marks,
‘imposed on Henry son of Henry Simeonis because he was implicated
in[104] the murder of a scholar of Oxford, twenty-five marcs, for twenty-five
marcs which we owed to Henry Simeonis his father for an island in the
Thames at Oxford which we have bought from him, and which said marcs
he begged should be reckoned to his son in the aforesaid fine.’
The next grant is dated the 27th of November, 1246[105]. The King
announces that he has handed over to the friars, for the enlargement of their
premises, the whole messuage, with its appurtenances, which Laurence
Wych (or Wyth), Mayor of Oxford, committed to him for that purpose,
desiring them to enclose the same as they shall see fit:
‘and the Sheriff of Oxfordshire was commanded to receive the messuage in
place of the King for the use of the said friars.’

It is quite uncertain where this land lay, and whether Wych granted it in his
public or private capacity.
For the next fifty years, excepting the undated grants of Richard Mepham
and Agnes widow of Guydo, which probably belong to this period, there is
no record of a gift of land to the Minorites. On the east they had already
reached the permanent limit of their property[106], and the Friars of the
Penitence of Jesus Christ settled about the year 1260 on the ground lying to
the west. This formed the parish of St. Budoc. In 1262[107] the King allowed
these friars to build an oratory here; in 1265[108] he granted them, as patron,
the church of St. Budoc (which adjoined their premises, and which, owing
to the removal or death of the parishioners, was too impoverished to support
one chaplain), ‘to make thence a chapel for themselves.’ With the church
they acquired[109]
‘the cemetery and the houses standing in the same and belonging to the said
church,’
with the proviso that the cemetery should always be treated as
consecrated[110] ground. The value of the church was 20s. a year[111].
At the Council of Lyons in 1274 the Friars of the Penitence of Jesus Christ,
or ‘Friars of the Sack,’ were forbidden to admit new members[112], and the
Order came to an end when the old members died out. The Minorites and
their friends therefore applied themselves to secure the property. As early as
1296 Boniface VIII wrote to the Bishop of Lincoln, ordering him[113] to
allow the Friars Minors to take possession of the house or area of the Friars
of the Sack, whenever the five remaining brethren should die or transfer
themselves to other religious Orders. At the court of Clement V, the first of
the Avignon popes, the claims of the Minorites were urged by John of
Britanny, Earl of Richmond; and Clement issued a Bull in their favour,
dated the 27th of May, 1309 (vi Kal. Jun. Ao iv)[114].
‘In a petition exhibited to us on your part,’ runs the document, ‘it is
contained that owing to the narrowness of your place at Oxford, you and
other friars, there flocking together to the University from divers parts of
the world in great multitude, do endure manifold wants and various
inconveniences. Since therefore the place of the Friars of the Penitence of
Jesus Christ of the same place of Oxford adjoining your place, is shortly, as

is believed, to be relinquished by the said Friars, to remain at the disposal of
the Apostolic Seat, according to the tenor of the Constitution published by
Pope Gregory X, our predecessor, in the Council of Lyons, it is humbly
prayed us, that we deign to concede to you that place for the enlargement of
your place aforesaid.’
This prayer the Pope goes on to grant ‘of his special favour,’ mentioning the
earnest supplications of John of Britanny[115] on behalf of the friars.
The King, however, also had a claim to dispose of lands which his
grandfather had granted, and which, in default of heirs or successors,
legally escheated to the Crown. By Letters Patent dated the 28th of March,
1310[116], Edward II assigned to the Friars Minors the property which
Henry III had previously given to the Penitentiary Friars, with the same
stipulation as to the cemetery. The land is accurately described; it was
contiguous to the place of the Friars Minors, in the suburb of Oxford,
twenty and a half perches long from north to south, six perches wide at the
south end, two and a half at the north, and four perches seven feet in the
middle.
Letters Patent of the same day[117] confirmed the grant of four other parcels
of ground to the Friars Minors: some of these may have been previously
held by the Friars of the Sack. The ‘plot of ground in Oxford,’ five perches
two feet from east to west, two perches and a half from north to south,
conferred on the Minorites by John Wyz and Emma his wife, may have
been within the walls, near the West Gate; the others were in the suburb.
Henry Tyeys gave land measuring six perches by five, and lying between
the site of St. Budoc’s Church and the Thames (Trill Mill Stream); Richard
le Lodere’s land, measuring fourteen and a half perches five feet, by four
perches and three feet, and stretching from the Thames to the above-
mentioned place of Henry Tyeys, was included in the grant, as was a larger
plot[118], measuring sixteen and a half perches from the Thames to the
‘royal way,’ and ten perches in breadth; which seems to have included the
south part of Paradise Gardens[119].
All these places are described as adjoining the property of the Warden and
Friars Minors of Oxford.

It was probably at the instance of the Crown and as a protest against the
papal claims that the Minorites a few years later formally surrendered to the
King the area which had belonged to the Penitentiaries, ‘in its entirety as it
came into their hands,’ and received it back of the King’s special favour in
pure and perpetual alms[120].
One fragment of the Penitentiary Friars’ property came into the hands of the
Franciscans somewhat later. In October, 1319, an Inquisitio ad quod
Damnum[121] was held in Oxford to decide whether Richard Cary could,
without prejudice to the King or others, bestow on the Friars Minors a place
in the suburb of Oxford, adjacent to their property, and measuring five
perches in length and five in breadth. The jurors declared that the grant
would not be injurious to the King or others, and that Cary possessed
sufficient property in the town to discharge all his civic duties. The place ‘at
the time when it was built’ was worth 20s. a year, but now, owing to its
ruinous condition, only 2s. Cary held it for a rent of 8s. a year of Johanna,
wife of Walter of Wycombe, Agatha her sister, and John son of Alice, who
was wife of Andrew Culvard, the heirs of Henry Owayn; they held it of the
Prior of Steventon, paying 4d. a year in lieu of all services. The plot was
therefore the fee of the Abbat of Bec mentioned above, and is probably the
same as
‘the place which the Friars of the Penitence bought of Walter Aurifaber, and
they pay thence to the Prior of Steventon 2s.[122]’
A few months previously a similar inquisition[123] was held at Oxford,
which resulted in an addition to the Minorite property on the east side
within the wall. This was a plot of ground of the annual value of 2s., five
perches by six, granted to them by John Culvard. The town, however,
claimed the right,
‘at all times when it shall be necessary, to have free entry and egress thence
to restore, repair and defend the wall of the said town.’
In 1321[124] Walter Morton obtained leave to grant in mortmain to the
Franciscans a place with its appurtenances, measuring five perches by five,
in the suburb of Oxford; and similar licence was given to John de Grey de
Retherfeld[125] in 1337 to bestow on them a tenement, six perches by five,
lying next their habitation on the east side within the town. This brings us to

the end of the list of grants of landed property to the Oxford Minorites—a
list which we may claim to be fairly complete. It is interesting to note from
what classes the donors were drawn. Most of them were men of business—
the leading tradesmen of the town[126]. Three of them, Laurence Wych, John
Culvard, and Richard Cary, were at various times Mayors of Oxford, and
the two latter represented the city in Parliament[127]. Richard Mepham
belonged to the higher rank of ecclesiastics. Master Thomas de Valeynes
seems to have been a person of some importance in Oxfordshire and the
adjoining counties[128].

Buildings.
Of the buildings of the Friars Minors in Oxford we have disappointingly
little information—with the exception of the boundary wall already
mentioned there are no remains of their house now visible. Excavations
might perhaps yield interesting results, but most of the ground is thickly
built over, and the information derived from the records and other sources is
rarely precise enough to enable us to identify with any certainty the sites of
the various buildings.
For the first twenty years the Friary must have presented a very modest, not
to say mean, appearance, and the brethren were probably contented to take
the accommodation afforded by the houses, which were granted them, with
little alteration. The infirmary built by Agnellus has already been noticed.
After they had been nearly a year in Oxford, the friars built a small
chapel[129]. In 1232, the King gave them
‘thirty beams in the royal forest of Savernak for the fabric of their chapel
which they are having built at Oxford,’
adding that
‘if any one in the same bailiwick shall wish to give them timber, the bailiff
shall permit them without hindrance to carry through the forest free of toll
oaks to the number of thirty[130].’
Probably this refers to the original chapel. It had a choir where the brethren
attended and celebrated divine service[131], and at, or over, the door of

which stood a crucifix, or wooden cross[132]. It was here, in the choir before
the altar, that Agnellus was buried in a ‘leaden box,’ as became the zelator
paupertatis[133]. The chapel was pulled down when the new church was
finished[134]. Under the auspices of Agnellus rose their first school, which
was apparently the finest of their early buildings[135]. Whether this was
afterwards enlarged, or whether new schools were built on the same site or
elsewhere, there is no longer any means of deciding.
These houses were situated within the wall, and it was not till the increase
of the ‘area’ between 1240 and 1250 that building on a large scale was
commenced between the wall and Trill Mill Stream[136]. The tendency to
build was strenuously resisted by the stricter party among the friars—the
party which upheld the early traditions of the Order. Eccleston relates how
an Oxford friar appeared after death to the custodian and warned him that,
‘if the friars were not damned for their excess in building, they would at any
rate be severely punished[137].’
An obscure passage in a letter of Adam Marsh probably refers to the same
tendency; even novices, he laments, are taught to neglect the things of the
spirit
‘for flesh and blood, for mud and walls, for wood and stone, for any kind of
worldly gain[138].’
The opposition of the older generation was, however, unavailing, and a
‘stately and magnificent[139]’ convent began to rise. But of the new friary,
too, there are but scanty notices. No English king bestowed on the house of
Franciscans at Oxford that loving care which Henry III bestowed on the
Minorite Church at Reading, or Edward II on the Dominican Church which
rose over the tomb of his ill-fated favourite at Langley. From royal grants
we learn that building was going on at the Grey Friars of Oxford in 1240,
when ten oaks were given to them by the King for timber[140]. In 1245 (July
7th),
‘the Sheriff of Berkshire was ordered to give to the Friars Minors of Oxford
for the works of their houses sixty shillings instead of six oaks which the
King gave them before[141];’

and a further grant of six oaks for timber in 1272 shows that the operations
were of a protracted nature[142]. From similar sources we find that the
Church, which was dedicated to St. Francis, was in process of erection in
February, 1246[143], and February, 1248[144]. At the latter date the friars are
again permitted to
‘enclose the street which extends under the wall of Oxford from the
Watergate ... to the small postern in the wall near the Castle.... We grant also
that the north side of the chapel built and to be built in the aforesaid street
may supply the interruption of the wall as far as it is to reach, the other
breaches in the wall being fully repaired as before, except the small postern
in the wall, through which the said friars can go and return from the new
place where they now live, to the former place in which they used to live.’
It would appear from this that the street was outside the wall. Mr. Parker,
however, states positively that it was ‘the inner road’ which they were
permitted to enclose[145]; in Wheeler’s Garden, south-west of St. Ebbe’s
Churchyard, there used to be a line of old walling, running parallel to the
city wall inside, and the space between these walls may have been the street
in question[146]. It must be remembered, however, that the friars had already
in 1244 acquired the road with the right to enclose it, and to throw down
this section of the city wall. In 1248, therefore, we may well believe that
little existed of the wall, which on the south side was never a very
prominent feature. The church running due east and west would extend
along and across the site of the wall, the west end being outside, the east
end inside. From the south end of Paradise Place, where the wall juts out
southwards for a few yards, to a point about the north end of King’s
Terrace, there have long been no signs of the city wall; and it is probably
here that the Grey Friars’ Church stood. The tradition is still preserved in
the name Church Place. Of the appearance of the church we know little.
The roof was tiled[147], like that of the Grey Friars’ Church at Reading; it is
probable the east end was flat, and there was no triforium[148]. Wood thinks
that one of the eight towers which figured in the pageant at the
inthronization of Warham in 1504, represented the tower of the Grey
Friars[149]. William of Worcester has left a somewhat puzzling[150]
description of the church in 1480[151].

‘The length of the choir of the church of St. Francis at Oxford contains 68
steps. The length from the door (valva) of the choir to the west window
contains 90 steps; so in the whole length it contains 150 (?) steps. The width
of the nave of the said church on the east (ab orienti parte) contains with
the aisle 28 steps. The length of the nave from the south side to the north
door contains 40 steps only, and there are ten chapels in the said north nave
of the church. The width of the north nave of the church contains 20 steps.
The width of each chapel contains 6 steps, and so the width of the whole
nave of the church with the ten chapels contains 26 steps. And each chapel
contains in length 6 steps. And each glass window of the ten chapels
contains three dayes (or lights) glazed.’
Reckoning William’s ‘steps’ at half a yard each[152], and correcting his
apparent mistake in addition, we find that the church measured seventy-nine
yards from east to west, the choir containing thirty-four yards, and the nave
forty-five. At its widest part the church measured twenty yards, ten yards of
which were taken up by the north aisle. Hence the width of the nave
properly so called, and of the choir, which in friars’ churches is, where it
exists, of the same width as the nave[153], was ten yards. The choir was
aisleless, and the north aisle was probably the only one in the church: this,
too, narrowed from ten yards to four towards the east end of the nave. In
1535 Friar Henry Standish, Bishop of St. Asaph, bequeathed £40 ‘for the
building of an aisle joining to the church of the Grey friars, Oxon[154],’
probably on the south side, but it is almost certain that this was never built.
The wider aisle must have extended nearly the whole length of the nave to
allow space for the north door and the ten chapels, all of which were built
on to the north wall. They would be in part sepulchral chantries, supported
by noble families or gilds, often containing the image or shrine of some
saint, while the shrine of the patron saint stood behind the high altar. They
were presumably later additions, and whether the church in its original form
attained the proportions here described must remain doubtful. But there is
no reason to suppose it was afterwards enlarged to any great extent. In the
thirteenth century, benefactors, great and small, were willing and eager to
help the friars to raise those splendid buildings which drew forth the fierce
denunciations of later reformers; and though much of the church was
doubtless built, like that at London, ‘from good common alms[155],’ there
can be little question that the chief ‘founder and benefactor’ was the

wealthy Richard Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall, and King of the
Romans[156]. It was in the choir of this church that his heart was buried[157]
‘under a sumptuous pyramid of admirable workmanship[158].’
Here, too, five years later the remains of his third wife, Beatrice of
Falkenstein, were interred, ‘before the great altar[159];’ and many other
monuments of nobles and famous men must have given the interior of the
church an imposing appearance. Among those buried here were several of
the Golafres: the tomb of Sir John Golafre, who died at Quinton, Bucks, in
1379[160], was in the chancel; that of his younger brother, William, was
probably in the same part of the church[161]. Sir John’s illegitimate son,
John Golafre, knight and lord of Langley, bequeathed his body to be buried
next his father’s, if he should die in England[162]; but
‘at the time of his death (1396) he altered his will in that part in which he
bequeathed his body to be buried in the chancel of the church of the Friars
Minors at Oxford, and willed and also bequeathed his body to be buried in
the Conventual Church of Westminster where our lord the King shall
dispose[163].’
William Lord Lovell, by a will dated 18 March, 1454/5, made provision

‘to be buried at the Grayfreris of Oxenford in suche place as I have
appoynted[164].’
The wills of less distinguished persons occasionally contain information as
to the interior of the church. In 1430 Robert Keneyshame, Bedel of the
University, willed to be buried in the Franciscan Church,
‘in the midst between the two altars beneath the highest cross in the body of
the church[165].’
James Hedyan, bachelor in both laws and principal of Eagle Hall, was
buried in the nave[166]. Agnes, wife of Michael Norton, was in 1438 buried
‘in the Conventual Church of the Friars Minors of Oxford before the image
of the blessed Mary the Virgin of Pity[167].’
And in 1526 Richard Leke, ‘late bruer of Oxford,’ desired
‘to be buried within the Graye ffreres in Oxford before the awter where the
first masse is daily vsed to be saide[168].’
But more honoured than any of these was the ‘fair stone sepulchre[169]’ in
which the body of Agnellus, the only Provincial Minister known to have
been buried at Oxford, found its final resting place. For the shrine of
Agnellus possessed all the fascination of miraculous association and
miraculous power. When the friars, many years after his death, went in the
night to remove the body from the original chapel before its demolition,
‘they found the little leaden box in which it lay, together with the grave, full
of the purest oil, but the body itself with the vestments uncorrupted and
smelling most sweetly[170].’
Here, too, we are told, was the tomb of one greater than Agnellus; but if the
statement of John Rouse, that Roger Bacon was buried among the
Franciscans at Oxford, is anything more than a tradition, it was perhaps not
in the church, but in the common burial place of the brethren of the
convent, that the Warwick antiquary found his grave[171].
The cloisters, of which we find no mention till the dissolution, were no
doubt situated on the south of the church, round ‘Penson’s Gardens.’

Whether the friars were buried in the cloisters, the garth, the chapter-house,
or ‘the cemetery of the Friars Minors,’ in which John Dongan was interred
in 1464[172] or sometimes in one place, sometimes in another, is unknown.
On the east of the cloisters would be the chapter-house[173]; over it, and
joining the church, a dormitory[174]. On the south of the cloisters, opposite
the church, stood the refectory. It is possible, but not probable, that the long
narrow building stretching down towards Trill Mill Stream, which is
marked in old maps of Oxford[175], was the refectory: Bridge Street marks
the site. The library may have been on the west side of the cloisters, but no
hint remains as to the building or its position, while the contents may be
more appropriately treated elsewhere. The warden’s house is equally
unknown; he may perhaps merely have had rooms set apart in some one of
the larger buildings[176], as was probably the case with the vice-warden[177].
From the Lanercost Chronicle we learn that in the thirteenth century the
‘master of the schools’ had a chamber of his own[178]; and Wiclif tells us
that in his time
‘Capped Friars, that beene called Maisters of Diuinitie, haue there chamber
and service as Lords or Kings[179].’
Ample accommodation for guests was a marked feature in most religious
houses, and there is no reason to suppose that the Oxford Franciscan Friary
formed an exception to a custom which, while it excited some animosity
against the apostles of poverty, tended to ensure the favour and secure the
alms of the rich[180].
The convent was supplied with good water by a conduit of leaden pipes,
which, according to Wadding, was made in the thirteenth century by a
magnate at his own expense, and extended many miles under the
watersheds of the Isis and Cherwell[181]. In 1246-7 we hear that the Friars
Preachers and Minors had appropriated many places on the Thames, and
had made there ‘ditches and walls and other things[182].’ Lastly, there were
three gates: one in Freren Street[183], perhaps an entrance to the church
through ‘Church Place;’ another in St. Ebbe’s Street, opposite Beef
Lane[184], where St Ebbe’s Churchyard now extends; and a third—their
principal entrance, which existed in Wood’s time—in Littlegate Street,
apparently where the latter is now joined by Charles Street[185].

This completes the list of conventual as distinct from the farm buildings,
and if the account is meagre and unsatisfactory, we may try to console
ourselves with William of Nottingham’s retort, when a friar threatened to
accuse him before the Minister General ‘because the place at London was
not enclosed:’
‘And I will answer to the General, that I did not enter the Order to build
walls[186].’

CHAPTER III.

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

Regency.—Conditions on which
dispensations were granted.—
Maintenance of Franciscan students at
the University.—What proportion took
degrees.—Relative numbers of the
various religious Orders at Oxford.
St. Francis himself was always strongly opposed to the learning of his age.
‘Tantum habet homo de scientia quantum operatur,’ he said, ‘et religiosus
tantum est bonus orator quantum operatur[187].’
But it was inevitable that the missionaries to the towns should be armed
with a knowledge of theology to enable them to cope with the numerous
heresies of the thirteenth century, and with a knowledge of physical science
to enable them to cope with the frequent pestilences caused by the disregard
of sanitary conditions[188]. In addition to this the influence of many learned
men in the Order could not but be felt; and the early Franciscans in England
were as zealous for learning as for good works.
‘They were so fervent,’ Eccleston tells us, ‘in hearing the divine law and in
scholastic exercises, that they hesitated not to go every day to the schools of
theology, however distant, barefoot in bitter cold and deep mud[189].’
Agnellus, though in Wood’s words ‘he never smelt of an Academy or tasted
of humane learning[190],’ frankly recognised the necessity. The school
which he built at Oxford has already been noticed:
‘but afterwards,’ adds Bartholomew of Pisa[191], ‘he had reason for regret,
when he saw the friars bestowing their time on frivolities and neglecting
needful things; for one day when he wished to see what proficiency they
were making, he entered the schools whilst a disputation was going on, and
hearing them wrangling and questioning, Utrum sit Deus, he cried: “Woe is
me, woe is me! Simple brothers enter Heaven, and learned brothers dispute
whether there is a God at all!” Then he sent 10l. sterling to the Court to buy
the Decretals, that the friars might study them and give over frivolities.’
Agnellus rendered the greatest service to his Order by persuading Robert
Grostete, the foremost scholar of his time, and the most influential man at
Oxford, to accept the post of lecturer to the friars[192]. The exact date at

which he undertook these duties is uncertain. He resigned the
archdeaconries of Northampton and Leicester in 1231, but he may have
been lecturer to the Franciscans some time before this; certainly he was
closely connected with their house at Oxford[193]. He was resident in the
University in 1234[194], and according to both Eccleston[195] and the
Lanercost Chronicle[196], he gave up his lectureship only to accept the
bishopric of Lincoln in 1235.
He was succeeded by Master Peter[197], who afterwards became a bishop in
Scotland. The third reader was Master Roger Wesham[198], who afterwards
(namely in or before 1239) was made Dean of Lincoln, and then (1245)
Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. The fourth was Master Thomas
Wallensis, who,
‘after he had lectured laudably at the Friars’ in the same place, was
appointed (in 1247) to the bishopric of St. David’s in Wales[199].’
Thomas was made Archdeacon of Lincoln by Grostete in 1238, at which
time he was lecturing in Paris[200]; he was then young[201] and it is probable
that he was already archdeacon when he lectured to the friars at Oxford.
All these men were seculars, not friars: it was important at a time when, as
Roger Bacon says[202], ‘the Order of Minors was new and neglected by the
world,’ to secure the services of men of recognised position and ability. Of
Master Peter nothing further is known. The other two were certainly close
friends of Grostete[203]. Matthew Paris bears testimony to the high character
and learning, the kindness and tact, of Roger Wesham[204]. Bacon ranks
Thomas Wallensis among ‘the wise men of old[205],’ who studied foreign
languages and knew the value of philology; and even Paris admits that this
enemy of monks[206] was a man of lofty purpose, and accepted the bishopric
of St. David’s, though it was the poorest see,
‘because it was in his native country, Wales, and he desired to console his
wretched fellow countrymen by his presence, advice, and help[207].’
The divinity lecturer to the Franciscans or ‘Master of the Schools[208],’ as he
was also called, had, as such, no status in the University. It is even doubtful
whether he counted as a ‘regent master,’ unless he also lectured in the

University Schools. Thus Adam Marsh protested against being required by
the Masters to subscribe a new statute on the ground
‘that he had three years ago retired from the office of teaching in their
University[209].’
But in a letter written shortly before this, and referring to the same subjects,
he mentions that he was ‘lecturing on Holy Scripture’ to the friars[210]. The
position of the lector was, in fact, not unlike that of a college tutor, except
that he was always a man of proved ability and long experience. To the
friars he was far more than a theological lecturer; he was a trusted friend, on
whose advice and sympathy and help they might reckon in all the conduct
of life. Such at least was the tradition established by Grostete and carried on
by Adam Marsh[211]. Both of them men versed in affairs of state, both men
of acknowledged weight in the counsels of the realm[212], and fearless
opponents of illegality and oppression, they not only trained the friars in
theology and philosophy, but taught them to comprehend the social needs of
the age.
‘I return your lordship,’ writes Adam to Grostete[213], ‘the breviate which
you wrote, “Of the rule of a kingdom and a tyranny,” as you sent it, sealed
with the seal of the Earl of Leicester;’
and Simon de Montfort had frequent consultations with the friar about his
government of Gascony[214]. It was from their daily intercourse with men
like these that the Oxford Franciscans became, if not the leaders, the
spokesmen of the constitutional movement of the thirteenth century[215].
The corpse of Simon de Montfort was buried by the Grey Friars of
Evesham, and it is probably to the Franciscan school that the Latin poems
in his honour are to be ascribed[216], as well as the form of prayer addressed
to him:—
‘Sis pro nobis intercessor
Apud Deum, qui defensor
In terris extiteras[217].’
The Oxford Franciscans regarded him as a saint and a martyr, though he
died excommunicate, and testified to the miracles which he wrought[218].

The lector had also his socius[219], a younger friar who acted as his
secretary, and whose time was almost entirely at his disposal. The position
of both lector and socius will be best illustrated by two extracts from the
letters of Adam Marsh.
In the first of these[220], addressed to the Provincial, he writes that he has
found Friar A. de Hereford, whom the Provincial had assigned to him as his
socius, affectionate and of good character, docile and well-read, and far
more capable than ‘some of those who are appointed by the counsel of the
discreet to instruct in Holy Scripture.’
‘I see,’ he continues, ‘that any friar who is associated with me to help me in
my various[221] and constant toil, will have to subordinate his ecclesiastical
labours and apply himself continually to supplying my defects, and
directing my goings, and supporting my burdens, though this might
sometimes produce in him virtue and industry and endurance. Far be from
me therefore such impious tyranny, as that I should be willing to see the
great gifts and spiritual progress in the said friar stunted or retarded or
thwarted by any consideration of private convenience; especially as I can
through the Saviour’s pity, be provided, as I have heretofore been by your
grace, with a competent companion without injury to the general welfare. I
have also reason to think that Friar A., however great be his willingness and
energy, will be unable without bodily suffering and mental disquietude to
continue permanently with me, unless the stringent rules are relaxed in his
favour (nisi quatenus urgentia mitigat obedientiae salutaris diurnos aestus
et vigilias nocturnas).
‘... I ask therefore confidently, that you will, if it be not displeasing to your
holy paternity, send to me without delay Friar Laurence de Sutthon, as my
socius, if he consents, and that you will send Friar A. to London to study, as
he himself greatly desires, if it be your good pleasure. And though Friar
Laurence suffer some tolerable defect, he is yet peculiarly fitted to help me,
though vulgar obstinacy may not think so.’
The other letter[222] is also directed to the Provincial.
‘I am not a little surprised,’ he writes, ‘that through some excessive caution
and severity, no provision has yet been made for the beloved Friar W. de
Maddele, who has up to now diligently borne the burden of teaching

(eruditionis impendendae), long since imposed on him. He is thus
compelled, not only to exhaust the vital spirit by excessive studies, but also
to wear out his bodily powers by writing every day with his own hand,
though his strength is not the strength of stone, nor his flesh the flesh of
brass. And while the other friars who have been deputed to the office of
lecturing, especially those to whom he has succeeded, had great volumes
and the assistance of socii provided for them, he alone does not seem to be
cared for; though I hear that he has a pleasant faculty of lecturing, is acute
in arguing, and in writing and speaking useful and acceptable to both friars
and seculars. It will therefore be for you, if you please, without delay to
take thought for the peace of mind and provide for the advancement
(provectui) of those who study.’
The position of the socius probably altered but little after this time. That of
the lector underwent a change. The Franciscans assimilated their system of
teaching to the system in vogue in the University generally: from the time
of Adam Marsh the lecturers to the Franciscans were merely ordinary
Regent Masters in theology belonging to the Order. This will be evident
from a comparison of the dates at which the various lecturers, whose names
have been preserved, held the office: a sufficient number of these dates has
now been recovered, on the indisputable evidence of contemporary records,
to put the matter beyond all doubt[223].
The appointment to the lectureship was in the hands of the Provincial
Chapter[224]; practically the person recommended by the leading brethren at
Oxford was elected[225]. This is true of the later as well as of the earlier
lectors. No Minorite could proceed to any degree unless he were first
authorised to do so by papal ordinance or by the election of his Order[226].
According to the Constitutions of Benedict XII, no Minorite might lecture
on the Sentences in a University (i.e. become B.D.),
‘unless he had first lectured on the four books of the Sentences with the
writings of the approved doctors in other studia which are in the same
Order called Generalia,’
or in one of certain specified convents[227]. The friars of the English
province were specially favoured in respect to the degree of D.D. It was
decreed in the General Chapter at Rome in 1411

‘that no one shall be promoted to the degree of master, unless he first go to
Paris, according to the papal statutes and the general institutes, and do all
that he is bound to do, Provincia Angliae excepta[228].’
However, the Franciscans at Oxford never obtained the right which was
enjoyed by the Dominicans at Paris, of being the sole judges of the fitness
of any friars of their own Order for academical degrees[229]. In the case of
Adam Marsh, the term of office was one year[230]; and this was probably
the general rule[231], though the readers might perhaps be re-elected in the
annual Provincial Chapter[232]. They often remained at Oxford after the
expiry of their year[233], and no doubt continued to lecture, though they
ceased to be ex officio representatives of the friars in their dealings with the
University or other bodies.
Even in the earliest times it was found necessary to modify the stringency
of the rule in favour of the lecturers. Visiting and good works were
subordinated to their scholastic duties[234]. They were provided with more
ample accommodation than the other friars, and their privacy was at certain
times inviolable[235]. In the Constitutions of Benedict XII (1337)
regulations for their support are given with some detail[236]. Masters,
lectors, and bachelors in Universities were to be provided with the
necessaries of life by the convents of the places where they lectured. But
their other expenses, such as those connected with the necessary books,
were to be assessed by the General or Provincial Minister and to fall on the
convent from which they were sent; or, if the convent was unable to
‘procure’ the funds, these were to be supplied by the custody or province in
which the native convent of the lecturer was situated. In addition to this,
seculars and members of other religious Orders who attended the lectures,
would no doubt have to pay fees[237].
We may reasonably infer that Grostete practised in the Franciscan school
the system of instruction in theology which he subsequently recommended
to the University. When consulted by the latter, he answered that the Regent
Masters in theology ought to take the Old and New Testaments as the only
sure foundations of their teaching and make them the subject of all their
morning lectures, according to the custom of the Doctors of Paris[238].
Roger Bacon laments the exaggerated respect which was paid to the
‘Sentences’ in his day, and points out that

‘the learned men of old, some of whom we have seen, such as Robert
bishop of Lincoln and Friar Adam de Marisco, used only the text’ which
was ‘given to the world from the mouth of God and of the Saints[239].’
At the Friary, as in the rest of the University, much of the teaching in the
theological faculty was, even in the thirteenth century, done by
bachelors[240]; the admission to the degree of B.D. was accompanied by a
licence to ‘lecture on the book of the Sentences.’ Some of the lectures
would probably be for the brethren alone; others were open to the
University[241]. The latter would certainly be the case when a friar delivered
the lectures, which he was bound to give as ‘Necessary Regent,’ in his
monastery. These courses seem however to have been sometimes delivered
in the University Schools in School Street[242].
The academic studies of the friars were confined to the faculty of theology
(in its wide mediaeval sense), and of canon law, the ‘handmaid’ of theology.
The regulars were for the most part subject to the same statutes as the
secular students in these faculties, with some important modifications.
The rules of the two Orders forbade their members to take a degree in
Arts[243]. The customs of the University, on the other hand, required that the
student of theology should have graduated in Arts[244]. The issue was
definitely raised in 1253[245], and we have from the pen of Adam Marsh a
detailed account of the struggle[246]. In February the Chancellor and
Masters of the University were formally petitioned to allow Friar Thomas
of York,
‘a man of high repute among the great and the many, on account of the
eminence of his character, ability, learning, and experience, to ascend the
chair of ordinary regent in Holy Scripture.’
The objection was then raised that he had not ruled in Arts. A committee of
seven was appointed by the Masters to prepare a report, and the
deliberations lasted, with a short interval, the whole of the next fortnight
(Feb. 22 to March 8). On Saturday, March 8, ‘the chancellor and masters
and some bachelors’ assembled to consider the report, which was to the
effect that Friar Thomas should incept this time, but that a statute should be
passed providing that for the future no one should incept in theology unless
he had previously ruled in Arts in some University, and read one book of

the Canon (of the Bible) or of the Sentences, and publicly preached in the
University; the Chancellor and Masters reserved to themselves the right of
granting dispensations, but provided against the use of undue influence of
powerful patrons in procuring such ‘graces’ by the clause:
‘but if any one shall attempt to extort a grace from the University through
the influence of any magnate, he shall ipso facto be expelled from the
society of the Masters and deprived of the privileges of the University[247].’
The report was at once accepted as the basis of a statute, to be signed by
‘the Chancellor and all the regent masters in theology, and Friar Hugh of
Mistretune, and the other regent masters in decrees and laws, and the two
rectors (proctors) for the artists, and Friar Adam called de Marisco[248].’
Adam however refused to sign, and the meeting was prorogued till the next
day, the first Sunday in Lent, only to be postponed again till Monday, when
Adam, ‘in the presence of the chancellor, masters, and scholars,’ repeated
his objections, adding others. He could not, he argued, agree to a statute of
which he disapproved, merely to gain his immediate point. The promised
‘graces’ were fallacious,
‘since by the opposition of any one man such a grace could be long delayed
or altogether prevented; thus even the best men would be rejected, and he
who was approved by divinity would be reproved by inhumanity.’
Further, it was unreasonable to require his signature, seeing that he was now
almost a stranger (quasi foras factus), having for three years retired from
the office of lecturing in their University. At length he formally washed his
hands of the whole matter, withdrawing even his opposition,
‘since the measure, dangerous as it was and distasteful to him, did not seem
to him to be conceived in a spirit of wilful injustice,’ (non videtur secundum
planum sui praeferre iniquitatem).
He then left the assembly, while the seven commissioners withdrew to
decide on the terms of the statute, which was merely a recapitulation of the
original report. The Chancellor at once sent Adam the final decision,
‘written with his own hand,’ which the latter duly forwarded to the
Provincial Minister. He left Oxford on Wednesday, the very day on which

the statute was passed, while Thomas of York celebrated his ‘vesperies’ on
Thursday and his inception on Friday, under the presidency of Friar Peter de
Manners. In view of the bitterness which marked both the contemporary
struggle between the University and Mendicants at Paris, and the disputes
between the University and Dominicans at Oxford sixty years later, it is
impossible not to be struck with the good feeling and moderation displayed
both by Adam and his opponents.
The controversy at the beginning of the fourteenth century was to a large
extent the sequel to the events we have just related[249]. The Dominicans in
1311 appealed first to the King, and when this proved of no avail, to the
Pope, complaining that graces were frequently refused to fit candidates, and
demanding the repeal of the statute of 1253. The appeal was read in the
church of the Minorites,
‘in the presence of a vast multitude of people there assembled on the
occasion of a public sermon to the clerks,’
but the Franciscans took no active part in the matter, and the details of the
struggle belong to the history of the Black Friars. The other Mendicant
Orders however were no doubt involved in the odium which attached to the
conduct of the Dominicans, and from this time forth the jealous feeling
between the friars and the University never died out.
The issue of the controversy concerned the Franciscans no less than the
Preaching Friars. In 1314 the arbitrators to whom the matter had been
submitted published their award[250]. The statute of 1253 was upheld, but
the right of refusing to any one, who had not ruled in Arts, the grace to
incept in theology, was practically withdrawn from each individual member
of Congregation and vested in the Regent Masters of the Theological
Faculty.
‘On such a grace being asked, every Master shall be bound to swear on the
gospels ... that he will not refuse such grace out of malice, hatred or
rancour, but only for the common utility and honour of the university. And
if notwithstanding this oath such grace be refused by any one, the reason of
the refusal shall at once be set forth in the same Congregation of Masters in
the presence of the Chancellor and proctors of the university and the
Masters ruling in Theology, and within ten days or less it shall be discussed

for the decision of the university whether that reason be sufficient or not.
And if the reason of the aforesaid refusal be sufficient in the judgment of
the Masters then ruling in Theology or of the majority of them, the refusal
of the grace shall hold good; but if the reason of the refusal be insufficient
in the judgment of the same persons, eo ipso the grace shall be granted[251].’
The Dominicans however hoped with the Pope’s assistance[252] to get more
favourable terms, and it was not till 1320 that they finally submitted to the
University[253]. The wording of the award was certainly vague and required
explanation. What, for instance, was the meaning of the expression, ‘the
common utility and honour of the university’? It is probably to this period
that the following decree is to be referred, and it may be regarded as a gloss
on the award of 1314[254]:—
‘Item, quod nullus de cetero, nisi prius in artibus rexerit, in disputatione
solemni alicujus doctoris in theologia, publice opponere permittatur, nisi
prius coram Cancellario et Procuratoribus Universitatis juramentum
praestiterit corporale, quod philosophiam per octo annos, solis philosophicis
principaliter intendendo, et postea theologiam per sex annos completos ad
minus audierit, seu partim audierit et partim legerit, per spatium temporis
supradicti: ad fidelem vero hujus statuti conservationem, noverint doctores
in theologia Regentes se fore specialiter obligatos.’
The award of 1314 remained the permanent law of the University, and for
the next century the friars confined themselves to insisting on the due
execution of its provisions. In 1388, Richard II, hearing that,
‘contrary to the decision of the aforesaid declaration you maliciously
prevent the friars from taking degrees in theology,’
wrote two strongly worded letters to the Chancellor, Proctors, and Regent
Masters of the University, ordering them, ‘under pain of our heavy
displeasure,’ to observe the statute of 1314[255]. In 1421, in consideration of
remonstrances from the King and the Archbishop of Canterbury, the
University gave a solemn undertaking to carry out the same statute, with
some changes in detail[256]. So long however as the condition, that the
candidate must have ruled in Arts, was inserted in the ‘form of licensing to
incept in theology[257],’ the religious felt themselves to be at a disadvantage
in comparison with the seculars, and bitterly resented their inferiority. When

therefore, in 1447, the University was raising funds for the erection of the
new schools, the Mendicants seized the opportunity to secure the abolition
of this clause, promising in return that each friar should pay 40s. to the
University at the time of receiving the licence[258]. This may however have
been only a temporary arrangement: the Registers of Congregation supply
little evidence as to its having been carried out[259].
The object of these statutes was partly to prevent the regulars from having
an undue advantage over the seculars in the matter of theological degrees,
but they must have had the effect of ensuring to the friars some preliminary
training before the commencement of their theological studies. Roger
Bacon, as usual, has a decided opinion on the necessity of such a training.
Writing in 1271[260], he says:—
‘During the last forty years there have arisen some in the Universities (in
studio) who have made themselves doctors and masters of theology and
philosophy, though they have never learnt anything of real value (dignum)
and are neither willing nor able to do so on account of their ‘status.’... They
are boys inexperienced in themselves, in the world, in the learned
languages, Greek and Hebrew; ... they are ignorant of all parts and sciences
of mundane philosophy, when they venture on the study of theology, which
demands all human wisdom.... They are the boys of the two student Orders,
like Albert and Thomas and others, who enter the Orders when they are
twenty years old or less.... Many thousands enter who cannot read the
Psalter or Donatus, and immediately after making their profession, they are
set to study theology.... And so it was right that they should make no
progress, especially when they did not procure instruction for themselves in
philosophy from others after they entered the Order. And most of all
because they have presumed in the Orders to investigate philosophy by
themselves without a teacher—so that they have become masters in
theology and philosophy before they were disciples—therefore infinite
error reigns among them.’
The Oxford friars however could not have acquired their great scholastic
reputation unless they had been better fitted than the seculars for the study
of theology; and Friar William Woodford had little difficulty in pointing to
many who, having entered the Order in their youth,

‘wrote many works of great wisdom, which remain for the advantage of the
Church[261].’
The clause of the statute of 1253 which prohibited the extortion of graces or
dispensations by means of the letters of influential persons was not
altogether effective. When, in 1358, the bitter feeling against the friars
found a spokesman in Richard Fitzralph and again burst forth into open
hostility, the clause was re-enacted in a more stringent form[262]. Any one
using such letters was declared for ever incapable of holding or obtaining
any degree at Oxford, and the University determined to hold up these ‘wax-
doctors’ to obloquy.
‘These,’ begins a proclamation of the same year[263], ‘are the names of the
wax-doctors, as they are called who seek to extort graces from the
University by means of letters of lords sealed with wax, or because they run
from hard study as wax runs from the face of fire. Be it known that such
wax-doctors are always of the Mendicant Orders, the cause whereof we
have found[264]; for by apples and drink, as the people fables, they draw
boys to their religion, and do not instruct them after their profession, as
their age demands, but let them wander about begging, and waste the time
when they could learn, in currying favour with lords and ladies.... These are
their names: Friar Richard Lymynster incepted in theology by means of the
prince’s letters, and his grace contained the condition that he should incept
and not lecture, but that Friar John Nutone his predecessor should continue
lecturing[265]: and Friar Giuliortus de Limosano of the Order of Minors,
who asserted that he was secretary of the King of Sicily, extorted from the
University, or rather from the theological faculty, by letters of the King,
grace to oppose.’
These instances hardly seem to justify the violent language of the
proclamation, and it is uncertain to what extent the Oxford Minorites were
guilty of the practice here denounced. Wiclif repeats the charge against the
Mendicants generally:—
‘A what cursedness is this, to a dead man, as to the world, and pride and
vanitie thereof, to get him a cap of masterdom by praier of Lords[266]!’
It remains for us to give an account of the academic, or rather scholastic
career of a Friar Minor at Oxford. As many of the friars entered the Order in

tender years, there is no doubt that boys’ schools formed part of many of the
friaries[267]. There is no evidence of such a school at Oxford, but at Paris
one existed where the student friars received a preliminary education[268]. It
is probable that the names of friars who showed ability were sent up by the
various convents to the Provincial Chapter and that a certain number were
elected by the ‘discreet men’ there assembled to go to the University[269].
There is no evidence of any definite rule fixing the number or proportion of
friars who might be sent from each convent, custody, or province, to
Oxford[270]. The average number of friars living in the convent at Oxford at
any time during the last quarter of the thirteenth and the first half of the
fourteenth century was probably between seventy and eighty[271].
A friar usually completed his eight years’ study of Arts, and often began his
course of theology[272], at his native convent. On coming up to Oxford he at
once entered on or continued his theological studies. A secular student of
Divinity during his first three years attended ‘cursory’ lectures on the Bible
and was admitted to oppose after the end of the fourth year[273]. In the
friaries the course of study would in the main correspond with that adopted
by the University. After six years[274] (instead of four) spent chiefly in the
study of the Bible, a friar was presented by his teacher, a Regent Master of
the same Order[275], to the Chancellor and Proctors; special enquiry was
then made as to his knowledge of the liberal arts, his age, morals, and
stature; and if he satisfied the University officers on these points, he was
admitted to ‘oppose in theology[276].’ Two more years elapsed before he
could become a ‘respondent[277].’ Opposition or opponency and responsion
were the two sides of a disputation: some question in theology was
proposed, probably by the Master of the Schools; the opponent took one
side (affirmative or negative) and put his case; the respondent then had to
take the other side. The difficulty of the respondent’s task was probably
augmented by his having to answer the arguments of more than one
opponent[278]. These regulations however were apparently superseded in
1358, when it was enacted that no religious who had not ruled in Arts
should presume to read the Sentences until he had opposed duly and
publicly a whole year in the ordinary disputations of the Masters, no other
person of the same Order opposing at the same time[279]. This appears to
have been the theory, and to some extent the practice, during the times
about which we have any detailed information—i.e. the period covered by

the early Registers. In none of the supplications and graces of the Minorites
is there mention of the lapse of two years or anything approaching it
between opponency and responsion; the latter exercise indeed is usually
coupled with opponency, and treated as a very secondary affair[280]. A few
instances will be sufficient as illustrations. In 1515 a grace was granted to
Friar W. German, scholar of theology, with the stipulation that half a year
should elapse between his opposition and responsion; the condition was
subsequently withdrawn at German’s request[281]. In 1457, Friar Gonsalvo
of Portugal supplicated that he might count two terms of opponency as a
year[282]; Richard Ednam in 1455 was allowed to count eight oppositions
pro completa forma oppositionis[283]. Friar John Smith was admitted B.D.
six months after he was admitted to oppose[284]. The opponent had to
dispute in each of the Schools of the Masters in theology[285]; towards the
end of our period, oppositions were held in the new Schools of
theology[286].
After nine years spent in theological study, the friar might be admitted to
read the Sentences of Peter Lombard publicly in the Schools[287], that is, to
take the degree of B.D. On the presentation of the candidate to the
Chancellor and Proctors, one at least of the Regents in theology must swear
that he knew him to be a fit person in morals and learning, the other
Regents, that they believed him to be such[288]. Within a year from this
time[289], the new Bachelor had to begin his lectures on the Sentences,
which he continued for a year (three terms), reading the text on most of the
‘legible’ days of each term, with questions or arguments pertinent to the
matter, giving the accepted interpretation. He was not to raise doubtful
points or attack the conclusions of another, more than once a term, except at
the first and last lectures on each book of the Sentences[290]. In the first year
also, he had to preach an examinatory sermon, which before 1303 was
usually held at the Black or Grey Friars, after that date at St. Mary’s[291];
another Latin sermon, ‘qui non sit examinatorius’ at St. Mary’s[292]; and a
third, before his inception, in the Dominican church, according to the
statute of 1314[293]. In the next two years he had to continue his studies, and
perhaps lecture on a book of the canon of the Bible[294]: the lecturing in this
case was apparently to be done biblice; i.e. without commenting or
discussing questions, except only on the text (quaestiones ... literales)[295].
Further, after the lapse of a year from the conclusion of his lectures on the

Sentences, he had to respond to eight Regents in theology separately (or to
all if there were less than eight); all or most of these responsions were to be
‘ordinary,’ or at least ‘concursive’ (concursivae), and responsions at
vesperies and inceptions were included in the eight[296]. Whether the rest of
these responsions took place at the terminal disputations in the Theology
School is not quite clear; but a later statute (1583) provides that none of
these terminal disputations shall count to any one ‘pro forma[297].’ The
responsions were latterly held in the new schools: before these were built,
in the schools of the various Masters. The Bachelor had then completed the
studies necessary for the degree of S.T.P. or D.D.
These exercises seem usually to have been insisted on, more or less fully,
even in the century before the Reformation. Friar John Sunday in 1454,
having finished his lectures on the Sentences, supplicated for leave to incept
after responding to each of the doctors and completing his course on the
Bible: the grace was conceded on condition that he should respond and
oppose eight times ‘pro forma,’ and respond twice ‘preter formam[298].’
Friar Thomas Anyden, S.T.B., supplicated (1507) that three responsions in
the new schools with an examinatory sermon and ‘introitus’ of the Bible
should suffice that he should be admitted to incept[299]. It was rarely that
three years intervened before the admission to read the Sentences and
inception[300]. Thus Friar Gilbert Saunders was admitted to oppose in Nov.
1511, and incepted in July 1513[301]. Friar John Smyth was admitted B.D. in
Dec. 1512, and D.D. in July 1513[302]. Another of the same name however
was allowed to incept in 1507 if he had spent four years in the study of
theology after taking the bachelor’s degree[303].
We now come to the exercises and ceremonies connected with inception.
First the grace had to be asked of Congregation; there was no fixed time for
doing this[304]. Secondly came the ‘deponing,’ which was done by all the
regent masters in the faculty present; all of them had to swear that they
knew the candidate to be a fit person; he must be of good life and honest
conversation and not deformed in body (corpore vitiati)[305]. He then
received in the ordinary form the Chancellor’s licence to incept, after
swearing to observe the statutes of the University and to incept within a
year of his admission[306].

On the day preceding the day fixed for his ‘vesperies,’ the licentiate sent to
each Master of Theology and requested him to attend the latter
ceremony[307]. Theological vesperies were in the thirteenth century held in
the various schools; a Franciscan celebrated his vesperies in the school or
church of the convent under the presidency of his own master[308]. At the
beginning of the fourteenth century, a statute was passed enacting that every
inceptor in theology should celebrate his vesperies in St. Mary’s
Church[309]. It does not seem that the masters in the faculty were bound to
attend[310], but the prospect of an important or exciting discussion often
attracted a large audience[311]. The exercises at vesperies consisted of
disputations on theological questions proposed probably by the
candidate[312], and announced to Congregation. All the masters present both
at vesperies and at the Act had the right to bring forward their arguments in
turn[313]. Thus Friar Hugh of Hertepol (c. 1280-1290) disputed ‘in the
vesperies before the inception of Friar John de Persole at Oxford[314].’
About the same time ‘Sneyt (debated) a question in the vesperies of Robert
de Bromyard; Thomas of Malmesbury, preacher, responded[315].’ The
proceedings were terminated by a speech delivered by the presiding master
in praise of the inceptor[316]. Grostete is said to have presided and given the
oration at the vesperies of Adam Marsh[317].
Inception followed the next day. Even this ceremony in the thirteenth
century took place sometimes in the churches of the friars[318]; but at the
beginning of the fourteenth century, it was certainly the custom to hold the
Act in St. Mary’s[319]. The inceptor was admitted into the gild of Masters by
one of the Masters (not the Chancellor), who was called the Father[320]. In
the case of a Franciscan, the Father would usually, though not always, be a
doctor of the same Order[321]. Those about to incept first read their lectures,
then opened a discussion on certain questions[322]. In later times the
exercises consisted of the discussion by all the inceptors, as opponents, of
three questions proposed by the respondent and sanctioned by
Congregation; the respondent, while statutably a D.D., was usually some
M.A. or B.D. who was allowed to count this responsion pro forma[323]. In
the more vigorous days of scholasticism, it is probable that the disputation
was more of a reality—that the inceptor (who took the part of opponent)
chose his own subjects[324] and was answered by a rival among the
doctors[325].

Many of the questions discussed at vesperies, inceptions, and other
disputations at Oxford at the end of the thirteenth century—probably in the
convent of the Minorites—are preserved in a manuscript at Assisi[326]. The
question on which Friar Hugh of Hertepol disputed at the vesperies of Friar
John de Persole was: An Christus in primo instanti potuit mereri
perfectione. Other questions of the same Friar Hugh were: An deus eadem
ratione formali videatur trinus et unus, An incarnacio sit possibilis. The
following are also among the questions in the same volume: Utrum deus sit
infinite potencie, Utrum virgo concepit sine semine, An intellectus sit forma
corporis, An deus sit in omnibus rebus, An omnes beati equaliter
participant beatitudine, An ratio ymaginis est in actuali visione dei.
We may next enquire how far the statutable requirements as to the period of
study were carried out: the only evidence obtainable is from the registers,
which begin about 1450. The statutes, as we have seen, required that a
religious should have studied Arts (i.e. philosophy) and Theology for
fourteen years before opponency. The periods mentioned in the
supplications vary from sixteen to eight years, the most usual number of
years being twelve. Before inception, six more years of study were
demanded, i.e. twenty in all. The period in the supplications varies from
fourteen to twenty years; the usual number is eighteen. There is however
reason to believe that these figures are not very exact. We have no means of
checking them with regard to opponency, and the University was probably
in the same position. But it frequently happened, that a friar, who had been
admitted to oppose on the ground of having studied ‘logic, philosophy and
theology’ for twelve years, supplicated two years later or less for grace to
incept on the plea that he had studied the same subjects for eighteen
years[327].
The expenses at inception were very heavy. The religiosi wore their usual
habit[328], and Mendicants were exempted from the payment of ‘commons’
to the University[329]. Further, when several inmates of the same convent
incepted on the same day, the charges (fees to the bedells and others?) were
the same as for one inceptor[330]. But these details did not touch the largest
expenses. According to ancient custom, every inceptor on the day of his
inception feasted the Regent Masters (apparently of all faculties)[331], and
Wiclif inveighs against the Mendicant Doctors for their

‘great gifts and making of huge feasts of a hundred and many hundred
pounds[332].’
Friar William Woodford, Wiclif’s contemporary, started from London to
take his D.D. with £40 in his purse[333].
Attempts were made to curtail the expenses of the friars. In his constitutions
for the reformation of the Franciscan Order in 1336, Pope Benedict XII
decreed[334], that
‘at inceptions[335] of Masters of the Order in theology, or of bachelors
beginning the Sentences, they shall not spend in food and drink, except
once only, more than would suffice for the moderate refection of the
convent of the place where such inceptions take place. Other bachelors,
lecturers or other students, both at Paris and at other studia generalia and
studia particularia, shall not spend anything at their own inception or
scholastic act or at the inception or act of others.’
It became usual, both among religious and seculars, to commute the
expenses of the feast for a fixed money payment to the University.
According to the scale fixed by statute in 1478[336], seculars who were able
to spend at the University more than £40 and less than £100 (a year), paid
twenty marks in lieu of the feast; those able to spend £100 or more, paid
£20. A monk’s composition was assessed at twenty marks; a friar’s at ten
marks or £6 13s. 4d. (equivalent to about £80 of present money). The sums
actually paid by the Franciscans varied considerably. Sometimes the
statutable amount was paid[337]. Friar John Whytwell (1449/50) paid
£10[338]. Friar Richard Ednam (1463) was required to give £15, as well as a
liberata to the Regents ex sumptu proprio[339]. More often (especially in the
sixteenth century) a reduction of the sum was granted by the University, the
concession being usually accompanied by the condition that the friar should
say masses pro bono statu Regentium[340]. Friar Thomas Anneday was
allowed to pay seven marks, ‘because he is poor and has few friends[341].’
Others obtained a reduction of their composition by one half[342]; or the
whole sum might be remitted under certain conditions, as in the case of
Friar Nicholas de Burgo[343]. Sometimes Congregation refused to allow the
full reduction asked for[344].

It was further customary for inceptors to provide robes for masters and
others attending their inception. Perhaps a trace of this custom may be seen
in the grace to Friar Gonsalvo of Portugal, who at his inception was to
‘give a livery, i.e. cultellos, according to the ancient practice, to all the
Regents[345].’
During the period of necessary regency, which followed inception, a secular
had the right to attend all meetings of Congregation, and was bound to
deliver ‘ordinary’ lectures publicly in the schools for the remainder of the
year in which he incepted and the whole of the following year[346]. A statute
of 1478 states the custom as enforced in the case of the Mendicants[347]:—
‘Every one of them so incepting shall be bound to necessary regency for
twenty-four months to be reckoned continuously from the day of his
inception, including vacations, or he shall be regent and pay to the
University according to the ancient customs; and although it happen that
some other of the same Order incept within the term of the said months, he
shall yet be bound to observe the foresaid form of regency, so that however
only one of them come to the house of Congregation, according to the
custom hitherto in use; proviso, that none of them shall omit to lecture
(expendet) more than thirty days in a year by virtue of any grace whether
general or special.’
Perhaps the exclusion of the friars, except one of each Order, from the
house of Congregation and consequently from the government of the
University, dates from the middle of the fourteenth century[348]. In 1454
Friar John David, S.T.P., supplicated for leave
‘to resume his ordinary lectures and exercise the acts of regent excepting
the entry to the house of Congregation[349].’
Dispensations from necessary regency were often obtained. In 1452 Friar
Anthony de Vallibus, D.D., asked leave to absent himself from all scholastic
acts for a fortnight in order to visit his friends who were sick[350]. Friar
William Walle was dispensed from fifteen days of his regency in 1518[351];
Friar John Brown from his regency during Lent in 1514[352]. Gilbert Sander
and Walter Goodfeld were released from the whole of their necessary
regency[353]. John Smyth obtained a similar grace as being ‘warden of a

convent and consequently very busy[354].’ Dispensations from the sermon
which was to be preached in St. Mary’s within a year of inception were also
very frequent[355].
These and other graces were usually granted subject to certain conditions.
The recipient was often to say masses ‘for the pestilence’ or ‘for the welfare
of the Regents’[356]: or he had to lecture gratuitously on some specified
book[357] or preach a sermon[358]; or again the payment of a sum of money
was imposed as a condition[359]. Thus in 1515 Friar John Flavyngur was
allowed to give extraordinary lectures on a book of the Decretals,
‘on condition that he would pay 6s. 8d. to the University on the day of his
admission and would read two books of the Decretals[360].’
Friar Thomas Frances received permission in 1521 to incept
‘on condition that he would pay 40d. within a month for the repair of the
staff of the junior bedell of arts and would preach a sermon at St. Paul’s
within two years and an examinatory sermon before his degree[361].’
Franciscan students were maintained at the Universities by a system of
exhibitions. These were provided sometimes by private benefactors[362],
usually by the native convent of the student out of the ‘common alms,’ with
the occasional assistance of other convents[363]. From the few traces which
remain of the custom we may infer that the exhibition was generally
reckoned at £5 a year, and that this sum covered the ordinary expenses of
living[364]. Masters, lecturers and bachelors, as already stated, were
supported by the convent in which they lectured[365]: but their allowance
was probably not much larger than that of the ordinary student friars.
Nicholas Hereford, preaching at Oxford in 1382[366], asserted that those of
the Mendicants who had graduated as masters or bachelors, in addition to
the ample allowance which they got from their community, begged for
themselves, saying, ‘I am a bachelor (or master) and require more than
others, because I ought to be able to live up to my position.’ (Quia oportet
me habere ad expendendum secundum statum meum.)
It is impossible to say what proportion of the Franciscans at Oxford
proceeded to a degree. In 1300 we have the names of twenty-two members
of the convent: of these, ten at least were then, or became afterwards,

Doctors of Divinity[367]. But the proportion of graduates to non-graduates
and B.D.’s in the whole convent cannot have been nearly so large. The
following statistics are derived from the University Registers[368]. From
1449 to 1463, five Franciscans obtained or supplicated for the doctor’s
degree; five others for that of bachelor only. From 1505 to 1538 (i.e. about
thirty-three years, as some pages of the Registers are missing), twenty-five
Franciscans incepted or supplicated for the degree of D.D.; twenty-six
others obtained or supplicated for that of B.D. (one of them also for
B.Can.L.): three more were admitted to oppose: one more supplicated for
B.Can.L. The proportion of D.D.’s to B.D.’s would generally be larger than
this: from 1532 to the dissolution in 1538 fourteen obtained, or supplicated
for, the degree of bachelor, two only became D.D.’s: we may reasonably
suppose that some of the fifteen bachelors would have proceeded to the
doctor’s degree had not the dissolution intervened.
The following figures will show the relative numbers of the various
religious houses in Oxford[369]. The Registers from 1449 to 1463 contain
the names of 10 Franciscans, 13 Dominicans, 12 Carmelites, 9 Austin
Friars, 44 Benedictines, and 8 Cistercians: from 1505 to 1538, of 57
Franciscans, 40[370] Dominicans, 24 Carmelites, 23 Austins, 169
Benedictines, and 44 Cistercians.

CHAPTER IV.

BOOKS AND LIBRARIES.
Absence of privacy.—Books of individual
friars.—The two libraries, and their
contents.—Grostete’s bequest.—Extant
manuscripts once in the Franciscan
Convent.—Alleged illegal detention of
books by the friars in 1330.—Richard
Fitzralph’s statements.—Richard of
Bury on friars’ libraries.—Dispersion of
the books.—Leland’s description of the
library in his time.
It is difficult to realise the external conditions under which the friars
produced their works. At the end of the thirteenth and in the early part of
the fourteenth century—the period of their greatest literary activity—
privacy must have been almost unknown. Only ministers and lectors at the
Universities were allowed to have a separate chamber or compartment shut
off from the dormitory[371]. But there can be little doubt that, from Wiclif’s
time onwards[372], each Doctor of Divinity had his chamber; and every
student had some place allotted to him, in which stood a studium, or
combined desk and book-case[373]. Every student friar had books set apart
for his especial use[374]; these books were obtained by gift or bequest[375],
by purchase[376] or by assignation by the Provincial[377] or Warden[378], or
they had been copied out by the friar himself[379]. Alexander IV expressly
declared that they were not the private property of the individual friars[380];
on the death of the friar who had had the use of them, they reverted to the
convent, or were distributed to others ‘by the Warden with the consent of
the convent and licence of the minister[381].’
There is no reason to suppose that the friars had a chamber specially set
apart as a scriptorium; they were comparatively free from the legal routine
or ‘office-work’ which the administration of their vast estates imposed on

the monks and their clerks. But the transcription of manuscripts was part of
the regular work of the Oxford Franciscans; and it is indeed the only kind of
manual labour expressly mentioned in connexion with the convent. Roger
Bacon’s statement[382] that he could only get a fair copy of his works made
for the Pope by writers unconnected with his Order, means merely that there
were no professional scribes among the Minorites of Paris. The vellum
which Adam Marsh asked the Custodian of Cambridge to send at his
earliest convenience[383], may have been intended for original compositions
of the friars, but it was probably to be used for a careful fair copy of some
work—perhaps a Missal or a book of the Bible. Several manuscripts,
containing the works of Nicholas Gorham, are still extant, which Friar
William of Nottingham copied at Oxford with ‘tedious solicitude’ and
‘laborious diligence,’ at the expense of his brother, Sir Hugh of
Nottingham[384].
It was naturally in the libraries that most of the literary treasures were
stored. In the fifteenth century there were two libraries in the Franciscan
convent at Oxford, the library of the convent and the library of the student
friars[385]. There is no evidence that either was founded by Grostete[386].
The convent probably received its first considerable collection of books
from Adam Marsh, to whom his uncle, Richard Marsh, Bishop of Durham,
bequeathed his library in 1226[387]. The next book we hear of at the Grey
Friars is the volume of Decretals purchased by Agnellus[388]—doubtless the
Decretum of Gratian with the additions codified by Raymund of Pennaforte
and approved by Gregory IX in 1230. In 1253, Grostete,
‘because of his love for Friar Adam Marsh, left in his will all his books to
the convent of Friars Minors at Oxford[389].’
From a rather obscure passage in one of Adam’s letters[390], this would
appear to mean all Grostete’s writings ‘both original and translated,’ not all
the books which he possessed: on the other hand, a copy of St. Augustine’s
De Civitate Dei is extant which the friars received from Grostete[391]. These
works of Lincolniensis were in the library in the middle of the fifteenth
century, when Dr. Thomas Gascoigne was allowed to consult them[392]. He
mentions particularly having seen a complete copy of Grostete’s letters[393],
his autograph gloss or exposition on the Epistles of St. Paul[394], two copies
(one of them autograph) of his commentary on the Psalter[395], a treatise

against luxury[396], and another super textum[397], both written by his own
hand. Boston of Bury notices his translation of the Testamenta XII
Patriarcharum in the same place. Friar Thomas Netter of Walden refers to a
book De Studio by Grostete, with autograph notes by the author, which he
had seen in the Minorite convent[398]; and Wadding mentions two more
treatises, or rather sermons, which Grostete gave to the friars—one De
Laude Paupertatis, the other De Scala Paupertatis[399]. Probably all these
were in the library of the convent[400]. Another relic of Grostete preserved
there was his ‘episcopal sandals made of rushes[401].’
The statement that all Roger Bacon’s works were in these libraries rests on
the authority of John Twyne[402], but it is not probable that his writings were
ever collected in one place. No doubt the works of the scholastic
philosophers, and chiefly of the Franciscan schoolmen[403], formed the bulk
of the library; which also contained a bibliographical compilation of
considerable value, namely the Catalogus illustrium Franciscanorum, of
which Leland often makes use[404]. St. Jerome’s ‘Catalogue of Illustrious
Men,’ was there bound up with ‘many other good books[405],’ his
commentaries on Isaiah and Ezechiel[406], a book called Speculum
Laicorum[407], and a few Hebrew and even Greek manuscripts[408].
Few only of the MSS. seem to have been preserved; very few at any rate
can be identified[409]. Caius College possesses two of them, a copy of the
Gospels in Greek and a Psalter in Greek[410]. The volume (already referred
to) containing St. Augustine’s De Civitate Dei, with Grostete’s annotations,
is now in the Bodleian[411]. A thirteenth-century MS. of some of Grostete’s
lesser works, with St. Augustine’s De Concordia quatuor Evangeliorum,
given to Lincoln College by Gascoigne, was perhaps obtained by him from
the Franciscan library[412]. The copy of Jerome’s ‘Catalogue of Illustrious
Men,’ which Gascoigne saw in this library, appears to be extant among the
MSS. in Lambeth Palace[413]. It may be reasonably conjectured that the
single copy of Adam Marsh’s letters[414], and some or all of the treatises
bound up in Phillipps MS. 3119[415], were also kept, or at any rate written,
in the Oxford convent. The following interesting notes occur in a Digby
manuscript in the Bodleian[416]:—
‘For the information of those wishing to know the principles of the musical
art, this book, which is called Quatuor principalia Musice, was given by

Friar John of Tewkesbury to the Community of the Friars Minors at Oxford,
with the authority and assent of Friar Thomas of Kyngusbury, Master,
Minister of England, namely a. d. 1388. So that it may not be alienated by
the aforesaid community of friars, under pain of sacrilege.’... (At the end),
‘This work was first finished on the 4th of August, 1351. In that year the
Regent among the Minors at Oxford was Friar Symon of Tunstede, D.S.T.,
who excelled in music and in the seven liberal arts. Here ends the treatise
called Quatuor principalia, which was put forth by a Friar Minor of the
custody of Bristol, who did not insert his name here because some thought
scorn of him’ (propter aliquorum dedignacionem).
Sometimes, if we may believe their accusers, the Friars obtained books by
less creditable means than gift, bequest, or purchase. In 1330[417] the Sheriff
of Oxfordshire received a writ from the King instructing him
‘to command the Warden of the Friars Minors at Oxford and friar Walter de
Chatton to give back to John de Penreth, clerk, justly and without delay,
two books of the value of forty shillings, which they are unjustly keeping,
as he says’;
failing this the said friars shall be summoned to appear before the King’s
justices at Westminster. The Sheriff forwarded this writ to the Mayor, but
the latter declared that the friars were not subject to his jurisdiction, ‘and
therefore nothing was done in the matter[418].’
The friars had on all sides the reputation of being great collectors of books.
Richard Fitzralph, the famous Archbishop of Armagh, was fond of
exaggeration[419], and no one will accept without considerable
modifications his statement, made before the Pope in 1257[420], that the
friars have grown so numerous and wealthy,
‘that in the faculties of Arts, Theology, Canon Law, and as many assert,
Medicine and Civil Law, scarcely a useful book is to be found in the
market, but all are bought up by the friars, so that in every convent is a
great and noble library, and every one of them who has a recognised
position in the Universities (and such are now innumerable) has also a
noble library.’

Some rectors of churches, whom the Archbishop had sent to the
Universities, had even been obliged to return home owing to the
impossibility of getting Bibles and other theological books. Perhaps these
rectors were not filled with a passionate desire to learn. In 1373 the
University passed a statute against the excessive number of unauthorized
booksellers in Oxford[421].
Richard of Bury mentions the great help he received from Dominicans and
Franciscans in collecting his books[422], and bears testimony to the
magnificence of the libraries of the Mendicants which he visited:
‘there we found heaped up amid the utmost poverty the utmost riches of
wisdom[423].’
But Richard of Bury notices a tendency among the ‘religious’ to
subordinate the love of books to
‘the threefold superfluous care of the belly, clothes, and houses[424],’
and the tendency became much stronger after his time. The almost[425] total
absence of books in the bequests to the Oxford Franciscans in the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries is the more striking because of the frequency of
such bequests to colleges. It is said that the Minorites sold many of their
books to Dr. Thomas Gascoigne[426]. Certain it is that in the latter days they
parted with them, just as ‘forcyd by necessitie,’ they parted with their jewels
and plate[427]. The exclusion of the Mendicant Friars from the use of the
University Library by the statutes of 1412[428], cannot have been any real
hardship to the Franciscans so long as their own library was intact. In the
sixteenth century however this was no longer the case, and we accordingly
find some instances of Franciscans supplicating for admission to the library
of the University[429]. The earliest instance is in 1507; but, as the registers
from 1463 to 1505 are lost, it would of course be ridiculous to attempt to
draw from this fact any inference as to the date of the dispersion of the
books of the Minorites. Leland visited the Friary shortly before the
Dissolution, and we have from his pen the last description of the once
famous library[430]:—
‘At the Franciscans’ house there are cobwebs in the library, and moths and
bookworms; more than this—whatever others may boast—nothing, if you

have regard to learned books. For I, in spite of the opposition of all the
friars, carefully examined all the bookcases of the library.’

CHAPTER V.

PLACE OF OXFORD IN THE FRANCISCAN
ORGANIZATION.
Learned friars as practical workers among
the people.—Their sermons.—
Educational organization throughout the
country.—Relations of the Oxford
School to the Franciscan Schools of
Europe.—English Franciscans teach at
foreign Universities.—Oxford as the
head of a custodia.—Provincial chapters
held at Oxford.
If the Franciscans became leaders of scholastic thought, they were first and
foremost practical workers. ‘Unfitted as the works of Roger Bacon or of
Raymond Lully might seem to the practical divine, it was for him, not for
the philosophic disputant, whether as a missionary among the Saracens or a
combatant of error and heresy at home, that these works were written[431].’
In the case of Roger Bacon this is abundantly evident.
‘Before all,’ he writes[432], ‘the utility of everything must be considered; for
this utility is the end for which the thing exists.... The utility of philosophy
is in its bearing on theology and the church and state and the conversion of
infidels and the reprobation of those who cannot be converted[433].... The
end of all sciences, and their mistress and queen,’ is moral philosophy, ‘for
this alone teaches the good of the soul[434].’
It is difficult to resist the temptation of quoting more passages of this
kind[435] (illustrating as they do the Franciscan view of life), especially as,
in the dearth of records, actual instances are hard to find: one proof
however may be brought that it was not all theory. Among the twenty-two
Oxford Minorites, for whom in the year 1300 the Provincial, Hugh of

Hertepol, claimed the episcopal licence to hear the confessions of the
crowds who thronged to the church of St. Francis, eight were then or
afterwards doctors of divinity and theological lecturers to the Friars at
Oxford, and among the others were two names of yet greater fame, Robert
Cowton and John Duns Scotus[436]. It must however be added that, of the
eight friars who were actually licensed by the bishop to hear confessions,
none appears as having subsequently lectured or taken a degree[437].
Here however we may see how the Franciscans brought their philosophy to
the test of experience in the details of everyday life; and they possessed to a
remarkable degree, in spite of—perhaps because of—their learning, the
power of appealing to the hearts of the people.
‘It is the first step in wisdom,’ said Roger Bacon, ‘to have regard to the
persons to whom one speaks[438],’
and his brethren followed this principle in their preaching. ‘Their sermons,’
says Brewer, ‘are full of pithy stories and racy anecdotes; now introducing
some popular tradition or legend, now enforcing a moral by some fable or
allegory[439].’ It has often occasioned surprise that the generation which saw
the rise of poetry in England, saw also the rise of English prose—that, in a
word, Wiclif was the contemporary of Chaucer. When we remember that,
for a century and a half, men versed in all the learning of their time had
been constantly preaching to the people in the vulgar tongue in every part of
the country, we shall see less cause to wonder at the vigorous language, the
clear and direct expression, of ‘the father of English prose.’
For the learning of the friars was not confined to the Universities[440]. To
the Franciscans Oxford was more than a place for study; it was the centre of
a great educational organization which extended throughout the land.
‘The gift of wisdom,’ to quote Eccleston’s words, ‘so overflowed in the
English province, that before the deposition of Friar William of
Nottingham, there were thirty lecturers in England who solemnly disputed,
and three or four who lectured without disputation. For he had assigned in
the Universities students for each convent, to succeed to the lecturers on
their death or removal[441].’

However, in practice this rule was not very strictly adhered to. Sometimes a
friar would pursue his studies with a view to becoming reader to a particular
convent[442]; but usually, when an ‘extra-university’ lectureship was
founded or fell vacant, the convent applied to the Provincial Minister for
any lecturer they chose[443]. Thus about the year 1250, the brethren at
Norwich requested that Friar Eustace of Normanville should be appointed
as their lecturer[444]. Eustace, after consulting Adam Marsh, declined the
office with the Minister’s permission, alleging in excuse his weak health
and his want of the necessary training and experience; and Adam informed
Robert de Thornham, custodian of the Cambridge ‘Custody,’ in which
Norwich was situated, of the decision[445]. The appointments, like those of
the Oxford lecturers, were in the hands of the Provincial Chapter, and the
various convents obtained letters of recommendation from powerful patrons
in support of their candidate[446]. The lecturer was appointed for one year,
and could be re-elected by the Provincial Chapter at the request of the
convent[447]. Nor was it only to brethren of their own Order that the friars
were sent. For many years a Franciscan was theological lecturer to the
monks of Christchurch, Canterbury, till at length in 1314 one of his pupils
was able to take his place. His teaching, wrote the monks, in grateful
recollection of their ‘lector,’
‘in urbe redolet Cantuarie, ac plures nostre congregacionis fratres ipsius
sedulos auditores ita sacre scripture aspersione intima fecundavit, quod
ipsos ad lectoris officium in scolis nostris subeundum ydoneos reputamus;
nos unum de fratribus et commonachis nostris predictis loco dicti fratris
Roberti ad hujusmodi ministerium exequendum duximus subrogare[448].’
Thus the friars disseminated over the country, from the universities
outwards, the ‘New Learning’ of the thirteenth century.
But the fame of the Franciscan school at Oxford was not only English, but
European[449]. Friars were sent thither to study not only from Scotland[450]
and Ireland[451], but from France and Aquitaine[452], Italy[453], Spain[454],
Portugal[455], and Germany[456]; while many of the Franciscan schools on
the Continent, both in universities and elsewhere[457], drew their teachers
from England, and, in England, mainly from Oxford. Eccleston mentions a
friar who studied with him at Oxford, where his lectures, after some
failures, won the admiration of Grostete; afterwards, as his fame increased,

he was called by the Minister-General to Lombardy, and enjoyed a great
reputation even at the Papal court[458]. Grostete, on his return from the
Council of Lyons, was anxious to get Adam Marsh out of the
neighbourhood of Paris as soon as possible.
‘It is not safe,’ he writes to the Provincial Minister, ‘to let Adam stay there;
for many greatly desire to keep him at Paris, especially now that Alexander
of Hales and John de Rupellis are dead; and so both you and I shall be
deprived of our greatest comfort[459].’
At another time[460] the General writes to the Provincial Minister of
England, requesting him to send English friars to Paris to teach; it was
probably on this occasion that Richard of Cornwall[461] left Oxford to win
the applause of his hearers at Paris. Peckham received his early education in
the schools of his Order at Oxford, and lectured at Paris and at the Court of
Rome[462]. Among those whom the Oxford Convent sent to teach in the
universities of the Continent, were John Wallensis, William of
Gainsborough, Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham[463]. All
these names belong to the thirteenth or early fourteenth century; from that
time onwards international jealousies and wars rendered the connexion of
the English universities with Paris far less close, and contemporaneous with
this breach was the beginning of the intellectual decline of the Order of St.
Francis.
Oxford was the head of a ‘custody,’ which contained, according to the list
given by Bartholomew of Pisa[464], seven other convents, namely, Reading,
Bedford, Stamford (Linc.), Nottingham, Northampton, Leicester, and
Grantham. What exactly the organization of a ‘custodia’ was, it is
impossible to determine; it was probably always rather indefinite, and
Bartholomew of Pisa points out that in early records the word is used very
loosely[465]. Perhaps it was originally intended to hold chapters of
custodies[466], as well as of provinces and convents. The Custodian had in
early years the right of making and enforcing byelaws in his custody; thus
‘in the custody of Oxford at the head of which Friar Peter was for twelve
years, the brethren did not use pillows up to the time of Friar Albert the
minister[467].’

Each custody had its special characteristic, Oxford being chiefly remarkable
for study[468]. Two Custodians of Oxford, Peter of Tewkesbury and John of
Stamford, became Provincial Ministers[469]. At first the Wardens of the
convents were appointed by the Custodian[470], but in 1240 the right of
election was transferred to the convents themselves, and many friars at the
same time demanded the total abolition of the Custodian’s office, on the
ground that it was superfluous[471]. It continued however, to exist down to
the Dissolution and seems to have implied a general right of supervision;
the Custodian was a kind of permanent visitator[472].
Several Provincial Chapters were held at Oxford. It was probably a
Conventual, not a Provincial Chapter, before which Grostete, then ‘reading
the act at the Friars Minors,’ preached his sermon in praise of poverty and
mendicancy[473]. Here Albert of Pisa held his first chapter as Provincial
Minister of England, and announced the stern principles which were to
guide his government[474]. Soon after this Elias instituted a severe visitation
throughout the Order, and sent Friar Wygmund or Wygred, a German, as
visitor to England in 1237 or 1238[475]. He held chapters at London,
Southampton, Gloucester, and Oxford[476]. At the latter place the Warden,
Friar Eustace de Merc, was bitterly attacked and excluded a day and a half
from the chapter, though his innocence seems to have been eventually
established[477]. The inquisitorial methods adopted by the visitor raised a
storm of opposition throughout the province, which found expression, on
the completion of the visitation, in a Provincial Chapter held at Oxford in
the summer or autumn of 1238[478]. Here a solemn appeal to Rome was
formulated, and exemption claimed from all visitations, except those
authorized by the General Chapter[479]. The result of this and similar
appeals from the Order was the final deposition of Elias by the Pope on the
15th of May, 1239[480].
In the spring or early summer of 1248 the Minister-General, John of Parma,
held a Provincial Chapter at Oxford,
‘in which he confirmed the provincial constitutions concerning poverty in
living and buildings (de parsimonia et paupertate aedificiorum). And when
he gave the friars the option of confirming or deposing the Provincial
Minister (W. of Nottingham), they unanimously asked that he might be
confirmed[481].’

Eccleston states that in the same chapter the Minister-General
‘recalled the brethren to unity who had begun to surpass the rest in singular
opinions[482].’
For this chapter the King provided one cask of wine and the necessaries of
life[483]. In 1289 three of the four Orders celebrated their Provincial
Chapters at Oxford, that of the Minorites taking place on the feast of the
Nativity of the Virgin (Sept. 8)[484]. No account of the proceedings remains.
The next Provincial Chapter at Oxford about which we have any
information was held in 1405, at a critical period in the history of the Order
in England. In 1404 ‘a great and very scandalous schism’ arose among the
Franciscans owing to the arbitrary and unconstitutional conduct of the
Provincial, John Zouch[485]. The friars appealed to the Protector of the
Order, the Cardinal-bishop of Sabina, who appointed Friars Nicholas
Fakenham and John Mallaert commissioners, with power to depose the
Provincial, if necessary. The commissioners deposed him in his absence,
called a chapter at Oxford on May 3rd[486], and proceeded to elect a
successor. The Vicar of the Provincial forbade the friars to attend the
chapter.
‘And the commissioners prayed the King to order the friars to assemble at
the chapter at Oxford for the reformation of their religion; and they
obtained royal briefs about this matter[487].’
John Zouche was afterwards reinstated by the Protector of the Order, but
does not seem to have ever made good his authority over the English
Province[488].

CHAPTER VI.

RIVALRY BETWEEN THE ORDERS: ATTACKS
ON THE FRIARS.
Rivalry between Friars Preachers and
Minors: proselytism.—Politics and
Philosophy.—Peckham and the Oxford
friars.—Evangelical Poverty.—Contrast
between theory and practice.—Attack
on the friars by Richard Fitzralph.—
Charge of stealing children.—Wiclif’s
early relations to the friars.—His attack
on them in his later years.—Charges of
gross immorality made not by Wiclif,
but by his followers.—The University
and the friars: summary of events in
1382.—Unpopularity of the friars in the
fifteenth century.—Foreign Minorites
expelled from Oxford.—Conspiracies
against Henry IV; part taken by Oxford
Franciscans.—Conventual and
Observant friars.
It was inevitable that a spirit of rivalry should exist between the two great
Mendicant Orders; and the rivalry soon developed into antagonism. In the
thirteenth century one lecturer to the Friars Minors at Oxford was removed
from the convent, another was suspended from lecturing, for causing
offence to the Friars Preachers and at their request[489]. An ‘enormous
scandal of discord,’ in Matthew Paris’ words[490], arose in the year 1243,
each of the two Orders claiming precedence of the other. Though there is
little direct evidence on the point, there is no doubt that Oxford was one of
the chief scenes of conflict. The controversy was carried on by ‘men of
education and scholars[491],’ and some details of it are preserved in the

pages of Eccleston. It arose from the proselytising tendencies of the two
Orders[492]. The Dominicans, according to Eccleston[493],
‘were wont to profess on the day of their entry, if they liked, as did Friar R.
Bacun[494] of good memory.’
Friar Albert of Pisa, when Provincial Minister of England, obtained a bull
from Gregory IX prohibiting this practice:
‘the Friars Preachers were not to bind anyone so as to prevent him entering
any Order he chose, nor were the friars to admit their novices to profession
till the year of probation had been completed[495].’
The Dominicans on their side claimed similar privileges, and obtained a
bull from Innocent IV to the effect that
‘no Friar Minor should receive those bound to them (suos obligatos); if he
did so, he should be excommunicated de facto; and they consented to the
same privilege about those bound to us.’
Eccleston complains that the Dominicans made such good use of the bull
that ‘they let scarcely any one go;’ and regards this equitable arrangement
as a great hardship to his Order. ‘But not long,’ he adds, ‘did this tribulation
last;’ Friars William of Nottingham and Peter of Tewkesbury obtained from
Innocent IV a revocation of his constitution[496].
The antagonism between the two Orders did not stop here, and in many of
the great questions of the day they are found on opposite sides. The Oxford
Franciscans, as we have already seen, were among the staunchest
supporters of Simon de Montfort; the Oxford Dominicans seem to have
sided with the King. The famous Mad Parliament, which Henry III
summoned to Oxford in 1258, met in the convent of the Black Friars, and
Prince Edward and his retainers stayed there before the battle of Lewes[497].
The same rivalry made itself felt in the sphere of philosophy, and the
Franciscans dealt a heavy blow at their more orthodox adversaries by
impugning successfully an important doctrine of Thomas Aquinas[498]. The
Angelic Doctor had held with Aristotle and against Averroes that the
individualising principle was not form but matter. How then, asked his
opponents, could the individual exist in the non-material world[499]? Such a

doctrine was in contradiction to the mediaeval theory of heaven and the life
after death; and the Church rallied to the side of the Franciscans. At Oxford,
Archbishop Kilwardby, Dominican though he was, condemned this among
many other errors in 1276, but the sentence seems to have had little effect at
the time[500]. It was chiefly against this opinion that Peckham’s measures in
1284 were directed[501]. If the Dominicans had allowed the aspersion cast
on their greatest teacher to pass without serious protest when the
condemnation came from one of themselves, they were anything but
content to submit to the adverse judgment of one of their rivals. Peckham
was attacked both by the Provincial of the Black Friars in a congregation at
Oxford[502] and in an anonymous pamphlet apparently by a Cambridge
Dominican[503]—‘a cursed page and infamous leaf,’ as he describes it,
‘whose beginning is headless, whose middle malignant, and whose end
foolish and formless.’ His action further involved the whole of the
Franciscan Order in England in the storm. He was accused of ‘having sown
discord between the Orders[504];’ and to defend himself against the charge
of unduly favouring the Franciscans, he denied that he had consulted the
latter on the subject and insisted on the previous condemnation of the same
error by his predecessor[505]. He claimed to be actuated by no personal
animus against the dead, whom he held in high honour and whom he had
himself defended; his attack was directed against ignorant and arrogant men
who presumed to teach what they did not know and to entice youths to the
same errors. ‘We cannot and dare not,’ he urged, ‘fail to rescue our children,
as far as we can, from the traps of error;’ and he forbade ‘curious
theologians’ to defend the condemned doctrines in ‘the disputes of boys’ (in
certaminibus puerilibus) at Oxford.

‘We by no means,’ he adds, ‘reprobate the studies of philosophers, so far as
they serve the mysteries of theology, but the profane novelties which,
contrary to philosophic truth, have been introduced into the heights of
theology in the last twenty years, to the injuries of the saints.’
The question became a matter rather of feeling than of argument; the esprit
de corps of the rival factions was involved, and the two Orders further
estranged[506].
Peckham lost few opportunities of advancing the interests of the
Mendicants at the expense of the monks and secular clergy, and of his
brother Franciscans against the other Orders. The discipline and morals of
the nuns of Godstow had suffered owing to the proximity of their house to
the university-town, and the Archbishop, in his injunctions for the better
government of the same, appointed two Friars Preachers and two Friars
Minors (or four of each if necessary) as permanent confessors to the
Convent[507]. In 1291 he wrote to the Prior of St. Frideswide’s urging him to
confer the church of St. Peter le Bailey on some one devoted to the Friars
Minors and nominated by them[508]. While strenuously asserting the right of
the Minorites to hear confessions in spite of the opposition of the parish
priests[509], he forbade the Carmelites and Austin Friars at Oxford to hear
any confessions of any persons whatsoever, regular or secular, clerk or lay,
male or female, and ordered the Archdeacon, if they disobeyed, to
pronounce public sentence of excommunication on them[510]. Arguing that
‘it was lawful to change a vow for a better one[511],’ he maintained that the
Franciscans might, as they had hitherto done, admit members of other
religious bodies to their Order; he would, he wrote to the Chancellor of the
University of Oxford, himself admit them, if he were still Provincial
Minister.
‘We have heard with great surprise,’ he proceeds, ‘that the Prior and friars
of the Order of St. Augustine in Oxford are imposing the mark of
excommunication on the Friars Minors of Oxford, and defaming them in
many ways, for receiving one of their friars in the aforesaid canonical form.
We therefore order you to go in person to the Austin friary and warn them,
in our name and by our authority, to cease from these detractions. But if
they assert that they have raised this tumult against the Minorites on the

ground of some privilege of theirs, you shall ask them to let me have a copy
of their privilege to compare with those of the Minorites which we have to
maintain; and we will certainly not allow them to be molested in
contravention of their privilege; nor will we endure that the Friars Minors
be injuriously oppressed, for by so doing we should break the commands of
the Pope[512].’
Peckham further, while condemning the erroneous opinions of the
Dominicans at Oxford, denied the claim to superiority which they put
forward[513]. The Franciscans claimed precedence on the ground of their
humility (which of course dwindled in inverse ratio as their assertion of it
grew), and of their absolute poverty. The Archbishop enunciated the
formula which was condemned by the inquisitors and the Pope in the next
century, and which formed, so to speak, the text of the controversy, ‘De
paupertate Christi.’ He defined the poverty of the apostles to be
‘having no title to the possession of any property real or personal, private or
common[514];’
the Minorites in following this example were in a state of ‘perfection,’ and
lived a holier life than any other Order in the Church.
The claim was generally admitted, and led to the exaltation of the Minorites
in the eyes of the world at the expense of the other Orders[515]. As early as
1269 a controversy on this point arose between the convents of the two
Orders at Oxford. A Dominican named Solomon of Ingeham accused the
Minorites of receiving money either with their own hands or through a third
party[516]. The Franciscans denied the charge and demanded the punishment
of Friar Solomon. The Dominicans asked them to prove the falsehood of
Solomon’s assertion and promised then to punish him. ‘The burden of
proof,’ replied the Franciscans, ‘lies with you who affirm, not with us who
deny.’ The Dominicans brought forward many instances in which they
maintained that the Minorites had actually received money. These,
answered the latter, were merely personal transgressions, and affected the
community no more than any case of carnal sin or disobedience. The
Dominicans, however, based their contention mainly on the argument that
money bequeathed to the Franciscans must be received either by them in
person or by intermediaries on their behalf. The Minorites answered

‘that, according to the definition of lawyers, money left by will is counted
among the goods of the deceased until it passes into the dominium and
property of the legatee. But it cannot become ours by legal right or pass into
our dominium without our consent. Thus money, howsoever it may be
deposited by the executors or committed to anyone for the brethren, is
always counted among the goods of the deceased as long as it remains
unspent, and the executors can, by their own authority or by that of the
deceased, reclaim it at pleasure. How then can it be called ours?’
Peace was eventually restored by the interposition of the Chancellor and
leading secular masters, at whose recommendation Friar Solomon withdrew
his words. It is curious that neither the document containing the account of
this quarrel, nor Peckham, mention the explanation which afterwards
became the accepted theory, that the ownership of the goods of the
Franciscans was vested in the Pope. Yet this explanation was originally
given by Innocent IV in 1245[517].
As far as the bulk of the Franciscan Order was concerned, the controversy
on ‘Evangelical Poverty’ was purely a theoretical one[518], its ultimate
importance rather accidental than real. The claim to ‘this perfitnesse,’ as
Daw Topias contemptuously calls it, rested not on fact but on a legal
construction. The friars had only the use, not the proprietorship, of their
lands and houses and goods. John XXII by his bull, ‘Ad conditorem
canonum,’ issued on the 8th of December, 1322, and declaring that use was
inseparable from proprietorship, withdrew from the Order the right of
holding property in the name of the Roman See, and thus went far to
destroy its theoretical claim to precedence. The whole Order, instead of the
party of the Spirituales merely, was for a time banded against the Pope; and
the dispute about a legal quibble became transformed under the hands of
Ockham into an examination of the position and claims of the Papacy, and
of the whole relation of Church and State.
Ockham probably studied at Oxford in his younger days, but it was no
doubt later in life, and under the influence of Marsilius of Padua, that he
developed the doctrines which made him ‘at once the glory and the
reproach of his Order[519].’ In philosophy he had many followers at Oxford
in the fourteenth century, and the Franciscan Convent was, like the rest of
the University, divided on the questions of Nominalism and Realism[520].

The dispute concerning the poverty of Christ was not allowed to rest. It was
this discussion which first brought the Archbishop of Armagh into open
hostility to the friars[521]; and Wiclif mentions the controversy as being still
carried on between the two Orders in his time.
‘Prechours seyn þat Crist hadde hiȝe shone as þei have; ffor ellis wolde not
Baptist mene þat Crist hadde þuongis of siche schone. Menours seyn þat
Crist went barfote, or ellis was shood as þei ben, for ellis Magdalene shulde
not have founde to þus have washid Cristis feet[522].’
A great historian has said of the Middle Ages, that ‘at no time in the world’s
history has theory, pretending all the while to control practice, been so
utterly divorced from it[523].’ An extract from the Patent Rolls[524] will
afford a striking illustration of the truth of these words as far as the learned
Franciscans, the professors of evangelical poverty, are concerned. The date
is February 22nd, 1378; the writ is issued in the King’s name.
‘Know that whereas certain horses, cups, books, money, silver vessels, and
diverse other goods and chattels, which belonged to our beloved brother in
Christ, John Welle of the Order of Friars Minors, doctor in theology, have
been abstracted and carried away out of his dwelling in London by one
Thomas Bele his servant and other evil doers, ... we have of our special
favour granted to the said John all the horses, cups, books, money, vessels
and other goods and chattels aforesaid, wheresoever they may be,’ &c.
It was probably the glaring contrast between the lofty claims of the friars
and their actual life, rather than any inferiority in their morality as
compared with the secular priests, which exposed them to the bitterest
denunciations and taunts of the reformers. The Mendicants were far more in
sympathy with the poor than were the endowed monks, and possessed far
more than the parish priests the confidence of the people[525]. Wiclif
recognised this fact, while he lamented it.
‘Though it raine on the Awter of the Parish Church, the blind people is so
deceived, that they will rather give to waste houses of Friars, then to Parish
Churches, or to common waies, though men cattle and beasts ben perished
therein[526].’

The first important attack on the friars in the fourteenth century was that led
by Richard Fitzralph, Archbishop of Armagh. He had been Fellow of Balliol
College before 1325 and Chancellor of the University in 1333[527]. While
assailing the whole principle of mendicancy, his main charge against the
friars, especially the friars at Oxford, was that of ‘stealing’ children, i.e. of
secretly inducing them to enter the Mendicant Orders. In 1357 the
Archbishop was cited to appear and defend himself before the Papal Court
at Avignon; and on the 8th of November, in a solemn assembly of Pope and
Cardinals, he made a great speech in defence of the parish priests against
the Mendicants[528]. The Archbishop stated that, owing to the privileges of
hearing confessions which the friars enjoyed, almost all youths in the
Universities, and in the houses of their parents (in nearly all of which friars
were to be found as ‘familiares’), had Mendicants as their confessors.
‘Enticed by the wiles of the friars and by little presents[529], these boys (for
the friars cannot circumvent men of mature age) enter the Orders, nor are
they afterwards allowed, according to report, to get their liberty by leaving
the Order, but they are kept with them against their will until they make
profession; further, they are not permitted, as it is said, to speak with their
father or mother, except under the supervision and fear of a friar; an
instance came to my knowledge this very day; as I came out of my inn an
honest man from England, who has come to this court to obtain a remedy,
told me that immediately after last Easter, the friars at the University of
Oxford abducted in this manner his son who was not yet thirteen years old,
and when he went there, he could not speak with him except under the
supervision of a friar.’
Parents were in consequence afraid to send their sons to the Universities,
and preferred to keep them at home as tillers of the soil. While the numbers
both of the friaries and of their inmates had enormously increased, the
number of secular students in every faculty decreased; the students at
Oxford, who in his time were reckoned at 30,000, had now sunk to 6000.
Though these figures are of course preposterously exaggerated, and though
the main cause of the diminution of the number of students was the Black
Death, there can be no doubt of the essential truth of the accusation. In 1358
the University of Oxford passed a statute forbidding the admission of boys

under eighteen to the Orders. The statute deserves to be quoted at
length[530].
‘It is generally reported and proved by experience, that the nobles of this
realm, those of good birth, and very many of the common people, are
afraid, and therefore cease, to send their sons or relatives or others dear to
them in tender youth, when they would make most advance in primitive
sciences, to the University to be instructed, lest any friars of the Order of
Mendicants should entice or induce such children, before they have reached
years of discretion, to enter the Order of the same Mendicants; and because
owing to the admission of such boys to the Mendicant Orders, the
tranquillity of the students of the University has been often disturbed;
therefore the said University, zealous in the bowels of piety both for the
number of her sons and the quiet of her students, has ordained and decreed,
that if any of the Order of Mendicants shall receive to their habit in this
University, or induce, or cause to be received or induced, any such youth
before the completion of his eighteenth year at least, or shall send such an
one away from the University or cause him to be sent away, in order that he
may be received into the same Order elsewhere: then eo ipso no one of the
cloister or community of such a friar, ... being a graduate, shall during the
year immediately following, read or attend lectures in this University or
elsewhere where such exercises would count as discharge of the statutable
requirements in this University (vel alibi quod in hac Vniversitate pro
forma aliqua sibi cedat); and this penalty shall be inflicted on all those of
the Order of Mendicants, and the associates of all those, who shall be
convicted by credible persons of having withdrawn youths in any way from
the University, or from hearing philosophy.’
The friars did not deny the charge, but defended their conduct[531], and
exerted themselves to the utmost to obtain a repeal of the statute. Their
efforts were successful. While a suit which they had begun in the Roman
Court was yet undecided, the Provincials of the four Orders laid their
grievances before the King in Parliament[532]. In 1366 the obnoxious statute
was formally annulled, on condition that the friars’ suits at Rome and
elsewhere against the University should cease[533]. The latter, however, did
not abandon the struggle; its influence is probably to be seen in the petition
of the Commons in 1402[534], that no one be allowed to enter any of the
four Orders under the age of twenty-one years. The King’s answer was not

favourable: he ordained merely that no friar should admit to his Order an
infant under fourteen years without the assent of his father, mother, or
guardians. The ordinance applied to the whole of England, and the petition
of the Commons is a sign that the popularity of the friars had suffered under
the attacks of Wiclif.
It has been clearly shown by recent criticism[535] that Wiclif’s enmity to the
friars was confined to the last few years of his life. His earlier opponents
were the monks—the religiosi possessionati. At one time he compares the
poverty and mendicancy of St. Francis with the manual labour of St. Peter
and St. Paul, in contrast with the possessions and worldly honours of the
ecclesiastics of his time[536]. He seems to have been on terms of some
intimacy with William Woodford, who may be regarded as the leader of the
Oxford Minorites in their subsequent controversy with the reformer and his
followers. Woodford relates[537] that
‘when I was lecturing concurrently with him on the Sentences[538] ... Wiclif
used to write his answers to the arguments, which I advanced to him, in a
notebook which I sent him with my arguments, and to send me back the
notebook.’
Wiclif had indeed many points of sympathy, especially on questions of
ecclesiastical polity, with the Friars Minors. He was in agreement with them
and in antagonism to the monks and many of the bishops, in the opinion
that the tribute to the Pope should be refused, and that the secular power
was, under some circumstances, justified in depriving the Church of its
possessions[539]. Eight or nine years before Wiclif wrote his famous tract in
defence of the Parliament of 1366, an Oxford friar and doctor declared in
his school that the King had the right of depriving ecclesiastics of their
temporalities; he was ordered by Congregation to recant this and other
opinions solemnly after a University sermon, and to pay 100s. to the
University[540].
When, however, Wiclif began to call in question the Church’s doctrine on
the Eucharist, he found himself in direct antagonism to the friars; and the
quarrel, which began in a dogmatic difference in the schools[541], soon
acquired a wider character. Wiclif’s accusations resolve themselves really
into three[542]; firstly, that the friars upheld the ‘idolatrous’ doctrine of the

Eucharist; secondly, that they maintained the theory of the mendicancy of
Christ; thirdly, that they taught the people to rely for their salvation on
letters of fraternity and prayers and masses, instead of on a good life;
whence a general demoralization ensued.
‘Popis graunten no pardoun to men bot if þei be byfore verrely contritte, bot
þese freris in hor lettres speken of no contricioun[543].’
It is improbable, however, that the indulgences granted by the friars differed
from the other indulgences of the Middle Ages, which in theory absolved
from the temporal punishment, not from the sin and eternal punishment.
Wiclif may have classed with the friars the ‘pardoners’ who did not belong
to any of the four Orders[544]. The records relating to the Franciscan house
at Oxford throw no light on the matter, which indeed belongs to the general
history of the Mendicants, not to the history of a particular convent.
Wiclif’s charges amount practically to this: the friars were the foremost
champions of the external, unspiritual form of religion, which he laboured
to destroy: they were no longer leaders of thought, but obstacles to
progress.
Though Wiclif’s writings, especially his English writings, are full of violent
invective against the friars[545], it is difficult to find in them any definite
accusations of the grosser forms of immorality. One instance will
sufficiently illustrate the difference between Wiclif and his followers.
‘Friars also,’ says the former, ‘be foully envenomed with ghostly sin of
Sodom, and so be more cursed than the bodily Sodomites that were
suddenly dead by hard vengeance of God; for they do ghostly lechery by
God’s word, when they preach more their own findings for worldly muck,
than Christ’s Gospel for saving of men’s souls[546].’
‘Jack Upland’ improves on this, and does not scruple to impute to the friars
generally the vilest sins.
‘Your freres ben taken alle day
with wymmen and wifes,
bot of your privey sodomye
spake I not yette[547].’

At Oxford the seculars, always numerically strong and jealous of the
regulars, rallied to Wiclif’s standard; while the Mendicants roused the anger
of the University by appealing to external authority. The friars were accused
of having made use of their position as confessors to stir up the peasant
revolt. On the 18th of February, 1382, the heads of the four Mendicant
Convents at Oxford sent a letter to John of Gaunt, denying the charge and
begging his protection[548]; all evils were attributed to them, and their lives
were in danger. Their chief enemy was Nicholas Hereford. In Lent of the
same year Hereford preached a University sermon at St. Mary’s, in which
he argued that no ‘religious’ should be admitted to any degree at
Oxford[549]. He was appointed by the Chancellor to deliver the principal
English sermon of the year at St. Frideswide’s Cross on Ascension Day
(May 15th), and used the opportunity to attack monks and friars and
mendicancy in general[550]. On the 19th of the same month, the ‘Council of
the Earthquake’ met at the Blackfriars in London, and condemned ten of
Wiclif’s conclusions as heretical and fourteen as erroneous; among the
seventeen doctors of divinity who took part in the council were four
Minorites, the Oxford Franciscans being represented by Hugo Karlelle and
Thomas Bernewell[551]. The Archbishop sent Peter Stokes, a Carmelite, to
publish the condemnation at Oxford. The Chancellor and Proctors resented
this interference with their rights, and the general feeling was strong in
Wiclif’s favour. Stokes and his brethren went in fear of their lives; when the
Carmelite ‘determined’ against Philip Repyngdon on the 10th of June, men
were seen in the schools with arms concealed under their clothes. At length,
on June 15th, the Chancellor was compelled, by the King’s command, to
publish the condemnation of the twenty-four conclusions;
‘and he thus so roused the seculars against the religious that many of the
latter feared death, the seculars crying out that they wanted to destroy the
University, though really they (the religious) only defended the cause of the
Church[552].’
In November the University tried to turn the tables on its adversaries; in an
assembly of the clerks at St. Frideswide’s, the Chancellor accused some of
the orthodox party (among them a Minorite friar) of heresy[553]. But from
this time the sacramental controversy tended to retire into the background,
and the alliance of monks and friars, which Wiclif’s attack on the faith had
called into being[554], came to an end. In 1392, Henry Crompe, a Cistercian

monk, who had been a prominent opponent of Wiclif, was charged with
having determined on several occasions against the right of the friars to
hear confessions[555]. Friar John Tyssyngton and other Minorites took part
in his condemnation in a Convocation held in the house of the Carmelites at
Stamford. In their anxiety to silence their adversaries, the Mendicant Orders
proved false to the tradition common to all the great mediaeval Universities
—the tradition of intellectual freedom; they upheld the claim of Archbishop
Arundel to visit the University, and lent their support to the rigid censorship
which he established[556]. But it is only fair to remember that, years before
this, the authority of the Church had been invoked against the teaching of
the friars themselves. In 1368 Simon Langham sent thirty errors of the friars
to the University, and it was enacted that no one should presume to defend
or approve these tenets in the schools or elsewhere ‘on pain of the greater
excommunication[557].’
The history of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries affords many other
illustrations of the hostility with which the friars, and especially the
Minorites, were regarded by the University. The subject of academical
degrees, and of the action taken by the University against the ‘wax-doctors,’
has been treated elsewhere. A statute, which probably dates from the first
half of the fifteenth century, provides that both the collatores of University
sermons shall, if possible, be seculars[558]. Wood says that in the years 1423
and 1424 there
‘were nothing but heartburnings in the University occasioned by the Friers
their preaching up and down against tithes.’
The chief offender, Friar William Russell, warden of the Greyfriars of
London, taught that tithes might be given arbitrarily, i.e. not to the parson
legally entitled to them, but ‘for the pious use of the poor,’ according to the
will of the giver. The University of Oxford condemned this doctrine and
ordained that everyone taking a degree should formally abjure it: the oath,
which remained in force till 1564, runs thus:—
Insuper, tu jurabis quod nullas conclusiones per fratrem Wilhelmum
Russell, ordinis Minorum, nuper positas et praedicatas, contra decimas
personales, et in nostra Universitate Oxoniae, necnon in venerabili concilio
episcoporum, anno Domini millesimo quadringentesimo vicesimo quinto

celebrato Londoniis, solemniter damnatas, nec alicujus earum sententiam
tenebis, docebis, vel defendes efficaciter publice aut occulte, nec aliquem
doctorem, tentorem vel defensorem hujusmodi, ope, consilio vel favore
juvabis[559].
For a similar offence another Franciscan, William Melton, D.D., was
arrested at the instance of the University, and compelled to recant[560]. The
Alma Mater kept a vigilant eye on her sons wherever they might be. In
1482 Friar Isaac Cusack, D.D., began to create disturbances in Ireland by
preaching the old Franciscan doctrine of evangelical poverty; he was
captured, sent to Oxford, and degraded and expelled the University as a
vagabond and a heretic[561].
The feeling of nationality fostered by the long French wars was not without
its influence on the friars in England and especially at the Universities. In
1369 the Chancellor caused a royal proclamation to be published at Carfax
ordering all French students at Oxford, both religious and secular, to leave
the kingdom[562]. In 1388 a royal writ was issued to the Warden of the
Friars Minors in Oxford at the advice of the same convent, warning him to
admit no foreign friars who might reveal to the enemy ‘the secrets and
counsel of our kingdom,’ and to expel any such friars for whose good
behaviour he would not be responsible, or who would not pray or celebrate
masses for the King and the good estate of the realm[563].
Among the many problems presented by the reign of Richard II, not the
least obscure is the passionate loyalty with which the Franciscans regarded
his memory[564]. Yet Richard II and his councillors were suspected of
Lollardy, while his successor posed as the champion of orthodoxy. Henry
IV, however, derived his support chiefly from the wealthy ecclesiastics, and
the Lollardy of the Court of Richard II was rather political than dogmatic;
the opinions prevalent at the Court were more in consonance with Wiclif’s
earlier teaching and with the teaching of the Franciscan Order on the need
of poverty in the Church and the evils of its endowments, than with the
Lollard doctrine of the Eucharist. In the early years of Henry IV the
Franciscans were active in organizing conspiracies[565]; the pulpit and the
confessional were used to spread disaffection against the new monarch[566];
and the failure of his campaigns was attributed to the magical arts of the
Friars Minors[567]. In 1402, eight Minorites of the convent of Leicester were

seized, and convicted on their own admission of having organized an armed
revolt to find King Richard and restore him to the throne[568]. They were
condemned to be hanged and decapitated at Tyburn, and the sentence was
carried out in the sight of many thousands without any ecclesiastical
protest. One of these friars was Roger Frisby, an old man and Master in
Theology[569]. On the Vigil of the feast of St. John the Baptist[570]—the
very day on which the rebels were to meet ‘in the plain of Oxford,’ his head
was taken from London Bridge and brought to Oxford;
‘and in the presence of the procession of the University, the herald
proclaimed: “This Master Friar Minor of the convent of Leicester in
hypocrisy, adulation, and false life, preached often, saying that King
Richard is alive, and roused the people to seek him in Scotland;” and his
head was set on a stake there[571].’
While subject to attacks from without, the Franciscan Order suffered from
rival factions within. The long-standing division between the lax or
Conventual, and the strict or Observant parties, at length received formal
recognition in the Council of Constance (1415) when the Observants were
constituted a semi-independent branch under a Vicar-General[572]. How did
this arrangement affect Oxford as a studium generale? The Observants as a
body produced few students; the reformed houses on the Continent objected
to send their brethren to Paris[573]. A few foreign Observants found their
way to Oxford in the fifteenth century[574]; and when later in the century
Observant friaries were founded in England[575], some of their members
studied in the Conventual house at the University[576]. Whether any part of
the Convent was set apart for them is unknown: according to all
appearance, the brethren of both branches lived together in peace and
goodwill.

CHAPTER VII.

ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE FRIARS’ MANNER OF
LIFE AND MEANS OF LIVELIHOOD:
BENEFACTORS.
Lost records.—Mendicancy.—Procurators
and limitors.—Career of Friar Brian
Sandon.—Charges of immorality
against the friars.—Their worldly
manner of life before the Dissolution.—
Poverty of the Convent.—Sources of
income.—Annual grants from the King
and others.—Frequency of bequests to
the friars.—List of benefactors.—
Classes from which the friars were
drawn.—Motives which led men to
become friars.
Of the internal economy of the Franciscan house at Oxford, or indeed of
any friary in England, little is known or ever can be known. The Registrum
Fratrum Minorum Londoniae is, in Brewer’s words, ‘the only work of the
kind extant. A painful proof, if such were needed, of the utter devastation
committed when the Franciscan convents were dissolved, and their libraries
dispersed[577].’ We may here give some account of the records which must
once have existed in every Franciscan house or province. From the earliest
times an annual compotus[578] or balance-sheet of income and expenditure
was drawn up, and if in later days this was sometimes omitted, an ex-
warden was always liable to be called to render an account to his
successor[579]. In each convent would also be kept a list of the brethren who
died there[580]; and lists both of living benefactors and of dead, for whose
souls prayers or masses were to be said[581], while many in their lifetime
received ‘letters of confraternity[582].’ In the decrees of the General Chapter

of Paris in 1292 it is commanded[583] that each minister should have the
lives and acts of holy friars carefully collected in his province and entered
in special registers, and bring them to the General Chapter; also that all
notable excesses of friars, grave crimes, and credible accusations, the
sentences passed and punishments inflicted on the offenders, should be
noted in books kept for the purpose, preserved in the archives of the
province, and faithfully handed on to each succeeding minister. The acts of
Provincial Chapters were also kept[584]. Of these and similar records we
have, besides the London register already alluded to, only a few letters of
fraternity[585]. Of English Franciscan records originated by or relating to the
convent at Oxford, not one (unless the list of lectors and the account of the
controversy with the Dominicans in 1269[586] can be called records) is
known to exist[587]. Any account, therefore, of the internal life of the
convent must be meagre and unsatisfactory in the highest degree.
The hours and numbers of daily services seem to have differed little, if at
all, from those observed in other monastic institutions[588]. We may
therefore omit this subject and treat of the points which receive additional
elucidation from documents relating to Oxford.
The first means of livelihood of the Mendicant Friars was naturally
begging. Certain of the brethren were appointed by the Warden to ‘procure’
food for the convent during some fixed period[589]. There were no definite
rules as to how many friars should be sent as ‘procuratores’ or
‘limitors’[590]; the details depended on the necessities of the convent and the
will of the Superior[591]. Each house had definite ‘limits’ assigned to it,
within which its members might beg[592]. The friars went two and two,
accompanied by a servant or boy[593] who carried the offerings, which were
usually in kind. The friar in Chaucer’s ‘Sompnoure’s Tale,’ himself a
‘maister[594]’ in the schools, after preaching in the church went round the
village—
‘In every hous he gan to pore and prye
And beggyd mele or chese, or ellis corn[595].’
A good deal of private begging was done by the student friars to obtain the
means of study[596]. Roger Bacon appealed to his brother in England, to his

powerful and wealthy acquaintances, for money to carry out the commands
of the Pope[597].
‘But how often (he writes to the latter) I was looked upon as a dishonest
beggar, how often I was repulsed, how often put off with empty hopes, what
confusion I suffered within myself, I cannot express to you. Even my
friends did not believe me, as I could not explain the matter to them; so I
could not proceed in this way. Reduced (angustiatus) to the last extremities,
I compelled my poor friends[598] to contribute all that they had, and to sell
many things and to pawn the rest, often at usury, and I promised them that I
would send to you all the details of the expenses and would faithfully
procure full payment at your hands. And yet owing to their poverty I
frequently abandoned the work, frequently I gave it up in despair and
forbore to proceed.’
Begging of this kind would either be unauthorized or legalized by special
license. The statutes of the Order[599] enact that every convent shall have its
‘procurator’ or ‘syndicus,’ who shall transact all the legal business of the
house and receive in the name of the Roman Church for the use of the friars
all pecuniary alms and bequests, or all such alms and bequests as can be
changed into money. The express object of these constitutions was to
‘preserve the Order in its purity and prevent the brethren being immersed in
secular affairs[600].’
It would appear that at Oxford in the fourteenth century the office of alms-
collector was held by one of the brethren. This conclusion, however
contrary to the spirit and letter of the statutes, seems warranted by a
remarkable legal document of the year 1341[601]. It is the record of a suit in
the Hustings Court, in which Friar John of Ochampton, Warden of the
Friars Minors at Oxford, ‘through Friar John de Hentham his attorney,’
charged ‘Richard de Whitchford minor[602],’ with refusing to render an
account of the sums received by him when he was ‘receiver of pence of the
said warden,’ and with embezzling sixty shillings or more, which he
obtained from various people on the Monday after the feast of St. Michael,
1340. Two of the sums are specified, namely, one mark by the hands of
Richard, servant of John de Couton, and 12s. by the hands of Thomas of
London. The Warden claimed to have suffered loss to the extent of one

hundred shillings; Richard de Whitchford could not deny the receipt of the
money, but on his request the court appointed two auditors, Richard Cary
and John le Peyntour; to these he rendered an account, and was found to be
sixty shillings in arrears; ‘and,’ the record continues, ‘as he cannot make
satisfaction he is committed to prison.’
In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the Oxford friars sometimes
employed laymen to represent them in the courts[603]; sometimes the
Warden appeared in person[604], but most of the legal business in the
Chancellor’s court at Oxford was undertaken by one of the brethren. From
1507 or before, to the Dissolution, this duty was entrusted to Friar Brian
Sandon. His name does not occur in the University Register, and he was,
though a priest[605], probably not a student; indeed, his administrative
business would hardly have left him time for other occupations. Between
1507 and 1516 and between 1527 and 1534, he appears as plaintiff or
defendant in some fifteen suits in the Chancellor’s court[606]. Some of these
afford glimpses into the life of the friars. On the 26th of March, 1512[607],
Father Brian instituted an action against John Morys, his proctor, alleging
that the latter
‘did not according to the convention before entered into between the said
friar and John Morys, bring corn to the house of the friars minors;’
and on April 5th John Morys was committed to prison ‘at the instance of the
provost (preposeti) of the friars minors for a debt[608].’
But if the friars did not grow corn, they seem to have made use of their
meadows as pasture land. On the 20th of May, 1529[609], Friar Brian sued
Margery, widow of John Lock, for 7s. 8d.,
‘for certain cheeses which the husband of the said Margery bought from the
aforesaid Brian Sanden.’
Eventually the case was submitted to the arbitration of William Clare the
elder, and Edmund Irishe, bailiffs of Oxford, with the addition of a third if
necessary, each party binding itself to abide by the decision of the majority
under penalty of 40s., in case of disagreement, to be paid to the party
willing to accept the judgment.

While these and similar actions were instituted by Brian in fulfilment of the
duties of his position, he was undoubtedly engaged in others of a private
nature. At one time he acts as attorney for a priest[610]. At another he is
charged with wrongfully keeping a knife, the property of dominus Galfred
Coper[611]. In 1531[612] he had a dispute with his tailor and appealed to the
law, alleging
‘that, whereas he had given to William Gos[613], tailor, three yards and three
quarters of woollen cloth to make him a habit, the said Gos had purloined
one quarter of a yard, and that in consequence his clothes were too short
(nimis brevem et succinctam).’
Brian having declared on oath that he had supplied the above-mentioned
amount of cloth, Gos promised to give him 14d. as satisfaction for the
missing quarter of a yard. But later in the day he again appeared and
charged the friar with perjury. After some more recriminations an
agreement was come to out of court, and we hear no more of the habit.
That his litigious spirit should sometimes have brought Friar Brian into
trouble we cannot wonder. Several times in the latter part of his career he
was in danger of ‘bodily injury;’ in 1532[614] he made application to have
Robert Holder bound over to keep the peace, and in 1534 the judge ordered
that James Penerton should not be released from Bocardo till he found
sufficient sureties that he would not inflict bodily harm on Friar Brian or his
friends (familiaribus)[615]. The same year he complained of having been
libelled by one Giles Mawket, a carpenter (fabro lignario), in the parish of
St. Ebbe’s[616]. This was probably a slander on his character, which was not
above suspicion. In 1535[617] ‘a woman of Radley named Anna’ asserted in
the Commissary’s court that she was with child by Thomas Denson,
Bachelor of Laws:
‘qui Denson (as the record puts it, reciting the evidence of Joanna Cowper,
another woman of ill-fame) egre tulit ut extraneus quisque familiaritate
dicte Anne uteretur; because (it is added in the margin) he tok fryer Bryan
wrastelyng wth her in a morning[618].’
The records of the Chancellor’s court contain charges of immorality against
two other Friars Minors[619]. The first was ‘dompnus’ Robert Beste[620],

who was summoned before the court together with a scholar of Broadgates
Hall,
‘on grave suspicion of incontinence and disturbance of the peace.’ ‘Then the
judge commanded ‘dompnus’ Beste to go to the prison house, namely le
Bocardo, and remain there for half-an-hour’—
apparently while his case was considered. It does not appear what the
charge against him was, or what (if any) further steps were taken[621]. His
companion was warned to moderate his attentions to the same Joanna, wife
of William Cooper or Cowper, of St. Ebbe’s, who appeared in the trial
above referred to.
Joanna seems to have taken a special interest in the Minorites. At the end of
1533[622] Friar Arthur, B.D., appealed to the court to stop her spreading evil
reports against him, which she had failed to prove; she was ordered to
abstain in future
‘from defaming the said friar or any of his house on pain of a fine of 40s. to
be paid to the Convent of friars minors, and banishment from the town; also
that she shall not in any way lay traps (paret ... insidias) for the said Arthur
or any of his Order or cause such traps to be laid, under the aforesaid
penalties.’
But if Friar Arthur was innocent, he was peculiarly unfortunate. A few
months later[623] he again appealed for protection against the libels of
Nicholas Andrews and John Poker, scholars of Peckwater’s Inn. At this time
Dr. Baskerfeld, Warden of the Grey Friars, was acting as substitute for the
Commissary, and he heard the case in the house of the Minorites. The
accusation has been carefully obliterated in the Chancellor’s book,
evidently by the friars themselves, but the gist of it can be deciphered.
‘Judex interrogavit eosdem an voluissent prefatum Arcturum accusare et
denunciare: qui responderunt se nolle[624] hoc facere ...; a quibus judex
petiit ... an aliquid scandalosum et d ... scirent contra dictum fratrem, et
interrogavit eos quid hoc erat: et dicebant ambo hiis verbis sequentibus
(tactis evangeliis); ... they saw the seyde frere Arctur in a chambre at the
sygne of the Bere in all hollows parische in Oxoford with a woman in a red
capp ... both locked together in a chambre, and seid to the mayd of the hous,

“then ba ... why ... suche ale here to be kept? It is not thy masters will and
thy mistres that ony suche ale shold be kept here.”’
Friar Arthur strenuously denied the accusation, and the court adjourned for
two hours. When it reassembled, the defendants refused to submit to Dr.
Baskerfeld’s jurisdiction, arguing that he was incompetent to decide a case
in which one of the members of his convent was so deeply implicated. Two
days later, however, they confessed before the judge that they would not
swear to their original statement, and both sides promised to forgive and
forget the whole matter.
Though none of these charges was actually proved, we must admit that they
show that the convent was not in a healthy state on the eve of the
Dissolution. There is certainly no trace of the religious fervour by which
even in the latter days some of the Observant convents were honourably
distinguished. We find the brethren at Oxford engaged in money
transactions, lending[625] and borrowing[626], ‘buying and selling[627].’ Friar
John Arter[628] kept a horse in the town and raised difficulties about the bill;
Randulph Craycoke or Cradoc, who had charge of the horse, would not part
with it till he had received ‘about ten shillings for food and grass,’ which
sum the friar refused to pay, asserting that Randulph had worked the horse
himself (laboravit dictum equum diversis (?) oneribus). The court, to which
the disputants appealed, reduced the amount by 2s.; but Arter was probably
unable to pay: no one appeared at the time appointed to claim the animal,
‘so we sent Cradoc away with the horse until his bill should be paid.’
The Warden, Friar Edward Baskerfeld, D.D., was plaintiff in a somewhat
similar case[629], in which both sides were represented by counsel. In his
evidence the friar deposed that he had lent Master Richard Weston, LL.B.,
‘a Roane hors of the value of 20s. in the hostel de flore de leust[630], and
that he had handed over the horse to the servant of the Subdean of Excestre
in the name of Richard Weston, and that he said these words, stroking
(palpando) the belly of the horse: “how I delyver the hors sane and sound
without spurre gallyng I prey you delyver hym so ageyn,” and that he never
saw hym to this day.’
The parties agreed to submit the dispute to the judgment of three arbitrators,
and the result does not appear in the records of the court.

No doubt some of the friars had private incomes and emoluments of their
own[631] (apart from the allowance or ‘exhibition’ which as students they
still received from their native convents or from benefactors); and some
may have lived outside the walls of their monastery[632]. But the convent
itself was very poor; the love of many had waxed cold, and it was inevitable
that in order to get a livelihood they should resort to means forbidden by
their Rule.
At the beginning of the sixteenth century[633], the Warden, Dr. Goodefyld,
leased one of the gardens lying within the boundaries of the convent to
Richard Leke, brewer of Oxford. The terms of the agreement are unknown,
but the friars thought them—or Leke’s interpretation of them, very injurious
to their interests, and in 1513 and 1514 demanded the repudiation of the
contract. Feeling ran very high, and Leke was in personal danger; the
Warden was bound over to keep the peace, and promised
‘that if his friars molested Richard Leke, he would keep them in safe
custody until the matter had been more fully examined.’
Again the case was referred to arbitration and the decision is unknown. It is
interesting to find that Leke was fully reconciled to the friars before his
death[634].
The poverty of the brethren was aggravated by the irregularity with which
payments, on which they might justly reckon, were made. One of their chief
sources of income was a royal grant of 50 marcs per annum during the
King’s pleasure, to be paid in equal portions at Easter and Michaelmas. It
was first instituted by Edward I[635] in 1289, and was continued by all the
kings (with the exception of Edward V) to the Dissolution[636]. Sometimes
the sum was paid direct from the treasury; but often (and this seems to have
been the general custom as regards royal benefactions to religious houses) a
sheriff or other officer was held responsible for the payment; either he was
instructed to send the requisite amount to the Exchequer, or he paid the
money directly; and the sums which he paid were accredited to him when
he produced his accounts at the sessions of the Exchequer. As may be
proved by many instances, the system did not conduce to regularity of
payment. Edward II, in December 1313, ordered Richard Kellawe, Bishop
of Durham[637], ‘to send to our exchequer at Westminster within fifteen

days of the day of St. Hilary,’ ten marks in partial satisfaction of the
grant[638]. But though this sum was to be the first charge on the arrears in
the Durham diocese of the tax of one-half of their income[639] imposed on
the clergy by Edward I (a. d. 1294), and though writs were repeatedly[640]
issued to enforce payment, we find that on the 4th of June, 1315, nothing
had been done, ‘unde vehementer admiramur[641].’
The fifty marks were never made a definite fixed charge on the revenues of
any one county nor were they levied year by year as a single sum; each year
some sheriff or bishop was made responsible for a fraction of the whole
amount. The annuity was on several occasions in arrear. Thus Henry IV in
the first year of his reign granted the friars ‘of his abundant favour’ (de
uberiori gratia nostra) all the arrears that had accumulated during the reign
of his predecessor[642]. Affairs of State made themselves felt in the
Franciscan convent. In 1450 Parliament passed a general act of resumption,
annulling all grants made since the King’s accession, and the annuity to the
friars ceased to be paid[643]. The brethren represented to Henry VI the
hardships which this loss of revenue inflicted on them, and in 1453 the
King ordered the arrears to be paid,
‘in order that the same warden and friars may be in a happier frame of mind
(hillariorem animum habeant) to offer up special prayers for us to the
Highest[644].’
Under the circumstances we cannot be surprised if the friars sometimes
took legal measures to recover the debts due to them. It was no doubt in
connexion with this grant, that in 1466 Richard Clyff, ‘custos’ of the Oxford
Grey Friars (first in person and afterwards through his attorney) sued John
Broghton, late Sheriff of Kent, in the Court of Exchequer, for 100s. due to
him from the preceding year, and claimed damages to the amount of ten
marks[645]. In 1488, in like manner, Richard Salford, Warden of the Friars
Minors at Oxford, applied to the Barons of the Exchequer to compel John
Paston, Knt., late Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, to pay a debt of £10 18s.,
and put in a claim to £10 damages; he recovered the debt, but the damages
were reduced to 26s. 8d.[646] On the same day he sued Edmund Bedyngfeld,
Knt., late Sheriff of the same counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, for a debt of
‘seven pounds of silver’ and 100s. damages; the amount of the debt and
20s. damages were awarded him[647]. The next year he again brought an

action against the same Bedyngfeld and recovered the debt (£4 2s.), while
the barons assessed his damages at 10s. instead of the £4 which he
claimed[648]. We gather from these instances that though the annuity was
usually paid and was not often much in arrear, it was not collected without
considerable trouble and expense on the part of the friars. These actions
involved a journey to London and the employment of an attorney[649]: they
were never settled in one day, and weeks or months elapsed between the
first hearing and the second.
The Grey Friars were also in receipt of annual or weekly alms from others
besides the King. Durham College paid them 50s. yearly[650].

‘In ye accompts of S. Ebbs made before 1542, it appears in all, yt ye
churchwardens of S. Ebbs parish paid to ye warden of ye Grey Freyers
Oxon 6d. per annum[651].’
The nunnery of Godstow[652] gave every week alternately to the Friars’
Preachers and Minors
‘fourteen loaves of the best wheat’ (pasto), worth in money value 8d. a
week, ‘for the soul of Roger Writtell; and the aforesaid friars shall have the
seal of the monastery to the amount of 34s. a year.’
The nuns also gave annually to each of the four Orders of friars at Oxford
3s. 4d. in money, and ‘one peck (modium) of oytemell and one of peas
(pisarum) in Lent.’ Among the ‘perpetual alms’ of Osney Abbey is
mentioned a grant of 20s. to the four Orders, as the price of one ox, at
Christmas, and of 4d. a week to each Order ‘according to ancient
custom[653].’
A large part of their revenue was derived from bequests. To minister to the
sick and the dying was one of the first duties which St. Francis practised
himself and enjoined on his followers: that in this respect the English
Franciscans followed his precepts may be seen in the tradition of them
which remained in the memory of this country and which Shakespeare has
expressed in ‘Romeo and Juliet’:
‘Going to find a barefoot brother out,
One of our order, to associate me,

Here in this city visiting the sick,
And finding him, the searchers of the town,
Suspecting that we both were in a house
Where the infectious pestilence did reign,
Seal’d up the doors and would not let us forth.’
(Act V, Scene II.)
But work like this receives little notice in history, and where it is mentioned
it is usually upon the sordid aspect of the case—the greed for legacies—that
the chroniclers insist.
In connexion with Oxford there are perhaps in the extant records only two
instances of a Franciscan being found in the chamber of sickness or death.
On Nov. 24, 1357, the will of Robert de Trenge[654], Warden of Merton, was
proved by the sworn testimony of Friar John of Nottingham of the Order of
Friars Minors, and Master Walter Moryn, clerk. The will itself is dated June
14, 1351, but in the Middle Ages it was rarely that a man made his will until
he felt that his hours were numbered, and although Robert de Trenge seems
to have lived some time longer, he was probably now lying in expectation
of death, struck down perhaps by the dreaded plague.
The other instance is of later date, namely 10th Dec., 1514[655]. A scholar,
John Eustas, had died intestate at Oxford;
‘at the instance of his administrators, Friar Richard of Ireland, of the Order
of Minors, appeared before us (the commissary), and confessed that he had
abstracted from the goods of the aforesaid dead man, without competent
legal authority, two mantles and thirty-one yards of linen cloth, and in gold
13s. 4d., which goods he has still in his possession.’
A few days later Friar Richard Lorcan was ordered by the court to restore
these goods under penalty of the law[656].
It is, however, in the wills of men and women of every rank and every
status that we get most insight into the work of the friars as visitors of the
sick. Unfortunately we possess but few wills as early as the thirteenth or
first half of the fourteenth century, while for the fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries, when the popularity of the friars had greatly declined, they are
fairly numerous. Taking those proved in the Chancellor’s court between

1436 and 1538, we find that one will in every eight, roughly speaking[657],
contains a bequest to the Minorites. In the ‘Old White Book’ (Oxford City
Records)[658], the proportion is about one to every four or five, and in the
last half of the fourteenth century, one-third of the wills of Oxford citizens
contain bequests to the Franciscans; and these figures are borne out by the
Oxford wills scattered through the early Registers at Somerset House[659].
The legacies come from all ranks; tradesmen and merchants being
especially well represented. Nor were the benefactors confined to Oxford
and its neighbourhood: the Convent, like the University, occupied a national
position. But it will be best to give as complete a list as possible of the
bequests to the Grey Friars, and leave readers to draw their own
conclusions.
John of St. John[660], clerk, by an undated will, probably about 1230, left
half a mark to the Friars Minors of Oxford.
Martin de Sancta Cruce, Master of the Hospital of Sherburn, near Durham,
left 10s. to them in 1259, with bequests to Friar Richard of Cornwall and
others[661].
Boniface of Savoy, Archbishop of Canterbury, left them fifteen marks at his
death in 1270[662].
Nicholas de Weston, citizen of Oxford, left them 10s. in 1271[663].
Walter de Merton, Bishop of Rochester, Chancellor of England, and founder
of Merton College, bequeathed twenty-five marks to them at his death in
1277[664].
Thomas Waldere, of Wycombe, left them 2s. in 1291[665].
Amaury de Montfort[666], papal chaplain, Treasurer of York, &c. in an
elaborate will dated Feb. 2nd, 1300/1, ordered that ‘the goods and revenues
of the aforesaid Treasury owed to him’ should be divided into three parts;
one-third was to be subdivided into six parts; the sixth part was to be again
subdivided into three parts, one of which was to go to the Friars Preachers
of Oxford, Leicester, and elsewhere; the second
‘fratribus Minoribus, Carmelitis, Oxonii, Leycestrie, Parisius, et fratribus
ordinis S. Trinitatis;’

the third, to pay any debts he might leave. As Amaury was dispossessed of
the Treasurership in Aug. 1265 (after holding it only for a few months), and
never recovered it, these bequests were merely a pious wish.
John de Doclington bequeathed 20s. to each of the four Orders in Oxford in
1335[667].
Nicholas Acton[668], parson of the church of Wystantowe (Salop), and
owner of property in London, left the Oxford Franciscans 40s. in 1337.
William de Burchestre left them one marc in 1340[669].
John son of Walter Wrenche, of Milton, spicer, by a will dated May 4th, and
proved on May 5th, 1349, gave to the Friars Preachers and Friars Minors of
Oxford each ten quarters of corn[670].
Edmund Bereford[671], lord of several manors near Oxford, in his will dated
Jan. 8th, 1350/1 and proved in 1354, gave, among many other pious
bequests, 20s. at his death and 10s. on his anniversary to the Minorites.
‘Item volo quod xij trisennalia celebrentur pro anima mea, videlicet ... in
quolibet ordine fratrum j trisennale.’
Henry Malmesbury, citizen of Oxford, left them 20s. in 1361[672].
John de Bereford[673], citizen and sometime Mayor of Oxford, bequeathed
13s. 4d. to each of the Orders in 1361,
‘ut habeant animam meam inter eorum missas recommendatam.... Item,
cuilibet ordini fratrum predicatorum Minorum Carmelitarum et
Augustinensium Oxon’, die sepulture mee 2s. 6d., et in die
commemorationis anime mee in mensem 2s. 6d., et die anniversarii mei 2s.
6d.’
Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex (who died 1361), devised
‘to the students of each house of the four orders of Mendicants in Oxford
and Cambridge £10 to pray for us[674].’
Richard Bramptone, butcher of Oxford, in 1362, left 10s. to be divided
equally among the four Orders of friars[675].

Walter de Berney[676], a wealthy citizen of London, with apparently no near
relations, was a benefactor: his will, made in 1377, contains, among many
similar bequests, the following:
‘Item fratribus minoribus Oxon’ et Cantebrig’ equaliter x li.’
Richard Carsewell, butcher of Oxford, in 1389 left the house in which he
lived, ‘without the South Gate of Oxford toward Grantpounde,’ to his
executors, with instructions to sell it
‘and to distribute to the poor friars minors of the money received for the
said tenement, ten marks[677].’
John Ocle or Okele, of Oxford, ‘skinner,’ left in 1390, 20s. a year for three
years to Friar John Schankton, of the Order of Minors, to celebrate masses
for the soul of the testator and his friends, in the Franciscan church at
Oxford. To the convent of Friars Minors he bequeathed 5s., to celebrate
divine service for him on the day or the morrow of his death[678].
Sir John Golafre, of Langley and Fyfield, knight, by will dated Jan. 19th,
1393/4, left the Minorites £10, if he were buried in their church:
‘et si ita contingat quod corpus meum sepultum fuerit alibi, tunc volo quod
predicti fratres minores non habeant nisi tantum x li[679].’
Richard de Garaford, of Oxford, who was buried in the Dominican
cemetery, left the Friars Minors 6s. 8d. in 1395[680].
John de Waltham, Bishop of Salisbury, left them 6s. 8d. in the same year ‘to
pray specially for his soul[681].’
John Maldon, Provost of Oriel, left 3s. 4d. to each of the Mendicant Orders
at Oxford in 1401[682].
John Bannebury, of Oxford, left 40d. to the Grey Friars in 1401[683].
Matthew Coke, of Oxford, in the same year, bequeathed 30s. to be divided
among the Orders of friars, ‘to celebrate for my soul,’ and added the hope:
‘et ultra hoc spero in voluntate uxoris mee[684].’

John Thomas, priest, left by will made at Oxford 1413, 10s. to the Friars
Minors there,
‘to say one dirige for me with their other usual suffrages[685].’
Lady Alienora de Sancto Amando in 1426 left £8 to be divided amongst the
four Orders at Oxford ‘to celebrate for her soul[686].’
Robert James, Esq., lord of Borstall, left 6s. 8d. to each Order at Oxford in
1431[687].
Agnes, wife of Michael Norton[688], in 1438 willed to be buried in the
Minorite church at Oxford, and gave instructions that her tenement in St.
Ebbe’s should be sold and that
‘from the money so acquired an anniversary should be held in the said
church of the friars Minors of Oxford for my soul and the soul of Thomas
Clamiter (?) my late husband, for the space of twenty years, the friars
receiving for each such anniversary 6s. 8d.’
James Hedyan, LL.B., and Principal of Eagle Hall, in 1445 bequeathed 8s.
to the Franciscans, in whose church he was buried, and 20d. to Friar Giles
(his Franciscan confessor?)[689].
Reginald Mertherderwa, doctor of laws and rector of the parish of St. Crida
the Virgin in the diocese of Exeter, in 1447 left 6s. 8d. to each of the four
Mendicant Orders at Oxford; and to the convent of Friars Minors
‘to provide one breakfast or dinner among them, that they may the more
devoutly pray for my soul, three shillings and four-pence[690].’
William Skelton, clerk, rector of the parish of St. Vedast, London, left the
Minorites 3s. 4d. in the same year[691].
Walter Morleyse, ‘de alta Sebyndon,’ Co. Wilts, left them 5s. (1451)[692].
Richard Browne, alias Cordon[693], LL.D. and Archdeacon of Rochester,
Canon of York, Wells, etc., provides in his will dated 1452, that if he dies in
or near Oxford, every Order of friars there shall have one noble (6s. 8d.)

‘for the labour of masses and other suffrages to be said for the salvation of
his soul and the souls of all the faithful dead.’ Further, ‘I give and bequeath
to Friar David Carrewe, Minorite, Master in Theology, 6s. 8d.’
William Lord Lovell[694] made arrangements before his death ‘to be buried
at the Grayfreris of Oxenford;’ (will dated 18 March, 1454/5, proved Sept.
1, 1455). In the arrangements a bequest would no doubt be included.
Master Philip Polton, Archdeacon of Gloucester (buried in All Souls
Chapel), left 40d. to each Order of friars of Oxford by will dated 1461[695].
John Dongan in 1464 desired to be buried ‘in the cemetery of the Friars
Minors of the University of Oxford,’ to whom he gives 40d.[696]
John Russel, of Holawnton, Wilts, made his will in 1469[697].

‘Also I give and bequeath to the iiij ordyrs off ffrerys wt in þe Vniuersite, of
Oxford iiij nowbles to haue myne obyte holden ther and to pray for my
sowle and the sowlys of sir Robert Russell, Knyght’ (and other members of
the family).
William Dagvyle, gentleman, left 30s. to the five Orders of friars at Oxford
in 1474[698].
William Chestur, ‘marchaunte of the staple of Caleys and Citezein and
Skynnere of London,’ bequeathed in 1476[699],
‘to euery of þe iiij ordres of ffreres in Oxenforde xxxiijs. iiijd.’
Robert Abdy, Master of Balliol College, left £4 to the four Orders of friars
at Oxford in 1483[700].

Alice Dobbis, ‘wif of John Dobbis of ye town of Oxenford Alderman,’ gave
and bequeathed 6s. 8d. to the ‘ffreris Minours’ in 1488[701].

James Blacwode, of Oxford, in 1490 left to the Minorites there ‘Vs et unum
Gublet de Argento pouncede[702].’
Master John Martoke, elected Fellow of Merton College in 1458, left each
Order of friars at Oxford 6s. 8d. (will executed 1500, proved 1503)[703].

Margaret Goldsmith in 1503 left 13s. 4d. to be divided among the four
Orders[704].
Thomas Banke, Rector of Lincoln College, willed in 1503
‘that the friars of each of the Religions in the town of Oxford should
celebrate exequies for him, and that each house should receive of his goods
6s. 8d.[705]’
John Pereson (buried at St. Mary Magdalen), left the four Orders 13s. 4d. in
1507[706].
In the same year, Thomas Clarke, the executor of the will of John Falley,
promised to pay Dr. Kynton, Minorite, 26s. 8d. in four instalments[707].
Edmund Crofton, M.A., who made bequests to Brasenose College and the
convents of St. Frideswide, Osney, and Rewley, left 26s. 8d. to the four
Orders (1508)[708].
William Hasard, of Magdalen College, Proctor of the University in 1495, by
a will dated 19th Aug. 1509 and proved 31st Aug. of the same year,
bequeathed 10s. to each house of friars,
‘praying each Order to celebrate one trental for his soul with the exequies of
the dead and a mass on the day of his death[709].’
‘Richard ffetiplace, of Estshifford[710] (Berks) Squyer,’ made a will in 1510
containing the entry:
‘Item I bequeth to the iiij orders of freers in Oxford xxvjs. viijd., and
eueryche of theym to kepe a solempne dirige and masse praying for my
soule.’
‘Dame Elizabeth Elmys of Henley upon Thamys’ in 1510 left to each of the
four Orders in Oxford, if she died in that neighbourhood, 10s. for a trental,
&c.
‘And I will that thos said places of freeres to whom my legacies shall come,
Immediatly aftir shall syng in their places oon masse of Requiem wt
placebo, dirige, laudes, and commendacion[711].’

‘Sebyll Danvers,’ widow, of Waterstoke, in the diocese of Lincoln and
county of Oxford, in 1511 left the four Orders 13s. 4d. to be divided equally
among them[712].
Thomas Dauys, of St. Edwardstowe, Worcester diocese, in 1511 gave in his
will
‘to the iiij orders of freeres for iiij trentalles to be said in Oxford xls.[713]’
William Perot, of Lambourne, Salisbury diocese, in 1511 left to the ‘Grey
freres of Oxon xxd.[714]’
Richard Harecourt, Esquire, of Abingdon, left 26s. 8d. to the four Orders in
Oxford in 1512[715].
William Besylis, Esquire, in 1515 bequeathed ‘to the grey ffryers in
Oxenfford vjs. viijd.’[716]
Robert Throkmorton, Knight, willed in 1518[717], that
‘ther be said for my soule in as shorte a space as it may be doon after my
deceas twoo trentalles in the Graye ffrieris of Worceter, ij Trentalles in the
grey ffreris of Oxford, ij trentalles in the grey ffreris of Cambrygge, ij
trentalles in the blake ffreris of Oxford (and same of Cambridge), and for
euery of thes trentalles I will there be gyven xs. apece.’
Sir Richard Elyot, ‘Knyght, one of the Kinges Justices of his commen
benche,’ willed in 1520, that the four Orders at Oxford and elsewhere,
‘haue at my burying or moneth mynde to kepe dirige and masse for me iijs.
iiijd.’[718]
John Tynmouth, Franciscan friar, Bishop of Argos, Suffragan of Sarum, and
parson of Boston, left to the Grey Friars of Oxford £5: the will was made in
1523, and proved in 1524[719].
In 1526 Richard Leke or Leek[720], ‘late bruer of Oxford,’ bequeathed 4d. to
each Grey friar of Oxford being a priest, and 2d. to each ‘being noo prest;’
6s. 8d. to the friars ‘to make a dyner in their owne place;’ 6s. 8d. to the
Warden ‘to prouide for the premisses;’ 20s. for altars; and an additional 10s.

to be paid in three instalments, namely, ‘at my burying,’ ‘at my monethes
mynde,’ and ‘at my yeres mynde.’
Walter Curson, of Waterperry[721], ‘gentilman,’ bequeathed a legacy in these
terms:
‘Also I woll and gyue to the iiij orders of ffreers in Oxforde for iiij
Trentalles to be doēn and had for my soule and my ffrendes soules xls.
eqally to be dewyded that is to wit to euery one of them xs.’ (executed 24
Nov. 1526, proved 2 May, 1527).
John Rogers (Exeter College) in 1527 also bequeathed each Order 10s.[722]
John Coles (1529), left the four Orders 13s. 4d. (his executors were M.A.’s)
[723].

John Seman, of Oxford, by will dated 1529, gave
‘vnto euery one of the iiij orders of ffryours in Oxford, so that they be at my
buryall and monethes mynde, xs.[724]’
Anthony Hall, of Swerford, a considerable landowner, desired in his will
dated 1529 and proved 1530, to
‘haue a trentall of masses to be said for me, the one half at our lady ffryers
(i.e. Carmelites), and the other half at the gray ffryers[725].’
John Byrton, of ‘Abburbury,’ also a farmer or landowner, left in 1530 to the
four Orders at Oxford 4s.[726]
Thomas Goodewyn, of Alkerton (Oxon), a large sheepfarmer, bequeathed
2s. 8d. to the ‘gray ffryers of Oxford,’ in 1530[727].
In 1532 William Clare, of Hollywell, Oxford, left 3s. 4d. to each Order of
friars at Oxford[728].
Jane Foxe, of Burford, in 1535 bequeathed her lands and tenements and ‘ii
c (200) shepe’ to her son, and 5s. 8d. ‘to the iiij order of frears in
Oxford[729].’
Henry Standish[730], Friar Minor, and Bishop of St. Asaph, in 1535
bequeathed

‘five marcs to buy books to be placed in the library of the scholars of the
friars Minors in the University of Oxford,’
ten marks to the church of the same friars, £40 for the exhibition of
scholars[731] in the University of Oxford, and £40 to build an aisle in the
church of the friars Minors at Oxford.
Thomas Sowche, of ‘Spellusbury,’ left to the ‘fore orders of freers in
Oxford, euery one of them iiijd.[732]’
Richard Elemens or Elemeus, of ‘Welleford’ (Berkshire?), in 1536 left ‘vnto
the Gray freers yn Oxford xs.[733]’
John Claymond, S.T.B., President first of Magdalen College, then of Corpus
Christi College, left 20s. to each of the convents of friars at Oxford in 1536,
‘ut celebrent in ecclesiis suis pro anima ejus[734].’
Elizabeth Johnson, of Oxford, widow, in 1537 left
‘to the four ordres of fryers four nobles to singe dirige and masse at All-
hallowes churche at the buryall and moneth mynde.’
The will was proved on Jan. 12th, 1538/9,—after the suppression of the
friaries[735].
Many testators authorized their executors to make due provision of trentalls
and masses ‘for the wealth of their souls,’ without specifying where they
were to be celebrated: the friars no doubt came in for a share of these. Thus
Thomas Hoye, Vicar of Bampton, in 1531 gives the following
instructions[736]:
‘It is my will that the forsaid goodes be preysid and put to vendicion and the
money therof cummyng to be ordered and distributed by myn executors for
trentallys of masses off Requiem eternam and masses of the V woundes of
our lord to be celebrate and said for the welthe of my soule and all Christen
sowles. Amen.’
On the other hand, the parish priests or rectors of churches were legally
entitled to one-fourth of the gifts, bequests, and fees given by their

parishioners to the friars[737]: but it is impossible to say whether the right
was generally enforced. In 1521 Leo X,
‘owing to the importunate exaction of the funeral fourth by some rectors of
churches,’
exempted the friars from the payment[738].
Among other sources of revenue may be enumerated the institution of
annual masses for fees (of which the wills often make mention),
commutations of penances for money[739], payment by the University and
others for the use of their church, schools, and other buildings on various
occasions[740], and collections in church[741]. At the beginning of the
sixteenth century we hear of a
‘gild of St. Mary in the church of the Friars Minors[742],’
which no doubt supported one or more friars to say mass in one of the ten
chapels. Of manual labour there is little evidence; the only kind mentioned
is the transcription of manuscripts of which we have already spoken.
We may here say a few words on two other points. Firstly, from what
classes of society were the Franciscans mainly drawn? In the thirteenth
century a very large number of men of position, of high birth, were attracted
to the Order; but that this was unusual may be gathered from the rejoicings
which took place over converts who were ‘valentes in saeculo[743].’ There is
every reason to suppose that the Grey Friars, as well as the other students at
the University, were mainly recruited from the sons of tradesmen, artisans,
and villeins[744]. Friar Brackley, D.D. was the son of a Norwich dyer[745];
and the towns probably supplied the greater proportion of the Oxford
Franciscans[746]. Secondly, what led men to take the vows of the Minorites?
Excluding again the thirteenth century (when the highest motives were
predominant), and confining ourselves to the later times, we must admit
that, apart from those who entered the Order as boys, either from choice or
at the instigation or compulsion of relatives[747]—the leading motive was a
superstitious belief in the externals of religion, in the efficacy of ‘the
washing of cups and pots.’ How strong this feeling was may be seen from
the fact that Latimer was at one time in danger of yielding to it.

‘I have thought,’ he wrote to Sir Edward Baynton, ‘that if I had been a friar
in a cowl, I could not have been damned, nor afraid of death; and in my
sickness I have been tempted to become a friar[748].’

CHAPTER VIII.

THE DISSOLUTION.
Attitude of the Grey Friars towards the
Reformation in its intellectual, religious,
and political aspects.—The Divorce.—
Visitation of Oxford in 1535.—
Suppression of the friaries in 1538.—
Condition of the Grey Friary.—
Expulsion of the friars; their subsequent
history; Simon Ludford.—Houses and
site of the Grey Friars.—Dr. London
tries to secure the land for the town.—
The place leased to Frewers and Pye;
bought by Richard Andrews and Howe;
resold to Richard Gunter.—Subsequent
history of the property.—Total
destruction of the buildings.
The intellectual torpor which oppressed Oxford for more than a century
after the disappearance of Wiclif and his followers was due less to the
repressive measures adopted by Archbishop Arundel, than to the want of
vitality, of adaptability to new modes of thought, in the scholastic
philosophy and method, with which the intellectual life of Oxford had for
so long been identified. The University as a whole did not extend a warm
welcome to the New Learning, and it was to be expected that the Mendicant
Orders especially should be attached to the old state of things, with which
their past greatness was connected, and to which their present position and
any prestige they still possessed were due[749]. The Grey Friars
consequently were inclined to oppose the revival of learning; and Tyndale
no doubt classed them among ‘the old barking curs, Duns’ disciples and like
draff called Scotists, the children of darkness,’ who ‘raged in every pulpit
against Greek, Latin, and Hebrew[750].’ Dr. Henry Standish, sometime

Warden of the Grey Friars of London and Provincial Minister of England,
attacked Erasmus’ version of the New Testament in a sermon at Paul’s
Cross and in conversation at Court, and seems to have been the recognised
leader of the ‘Trojan’ party in England[751]. But even among the Minorites
there are traces of the influence of the Renaissance. Another Provincial
Minister, Richard Brynkley, was a student of Greek, and was supplied with
a copy of the Gospels in Greek from the Franciscan Library at Oxford. Friar
Nicholas de Burgo seems to have been one of that band of Humanists
whom Wolsey attracted to Oxford, that they might propagate in his own
University the learning and culture of Italy[752].
The close historical relation, notwithstanding the fundamental differences,
between the intellectual movement and the religious movement, was neatly
expressed in a saying current among the friars: ‘Erasmus laid the egg;
Luther hatched it[753].’ The beginnings of the English Reformation in its
religious aspect are to be sought among the educated classes, especially at
Cambridge. The Minorites, while generally hostile to the new religion[754],
did not take a leading part in suppressing it. And when it is remembered
how very little progress the Lutheran doctrines made in England before the
Dissolution, the few instances of sympathy with those doctrines recorded in
the lives of Oxford Franciscans acquire a certain importance[755]. These,
however, were exceptional cases. If we trace the fortunes of individual
Franciscans after the Dissolution, it will be found that no generalization as
to their attitude towards the Reformation can be made. A few remained
loyal to the old religion[756], others embraced the new[757], and on both
sides persecution was suffered for conscience’ sake[758]; others again
contrived to reconcile themselves with both old and new according to
circumstances[759].
With the Reformation as a political movement, the Franciscans had more
sympathy. A large section of them had, long before this, taught the
supremacy of the State over the Church in all things political[760]; they
approved in principle the confiscation of Church-property for the common
good[761]; and Friar Henry Standish, in defending the claim of the temporal
courts to try and punish criminous clerks, together with the broad principles
on which that claim rested, was only applying to present circumstances the
time-honoured traditions of his Order[762]. It is true that the Friars of the
Observance resisted the royal supremacy in 1534. But the supremacy

claimed by Henry VIII went beyond anything asserted by his predecessors,
involving, as it did in effect, the establishment of a lay jurisdiction superior
to all ecclesiastical courts in spiritualibus as well as in temporalibus,
constituting Henry ‘a king with a pope in his belly’[763]. The Franciscans at
Oxford seem, like most of the religious, to have accepted the supremacy in
this extended form and to have taken the oath without demur: at least there
is no evidence to the contrary[764].
The oath administered to the monks and friars involved an
acknowledgment, not only of the royal supremacy, but of the lawfulness of
Henry’s divorce from Katharine and marriage with Anne Boleyn, and a
promise to preach the same on every occasion[765]. The attitude of the
Oxford Franciscans to the divorce, so far as it can be ascertained, may be
briefly stated here.
Henry attached great importance to securing a decision in favour of his
divorce from the chief universities of Europe. The divorce became the all-
absorbing topic at Oxford; and individual Minorites took a prominent part
in the discussions. But the convent as a whole did not present a united front.
Dr. Thomas Kirkham, a Franciscan, is mentioned as one of the Doctors of
Divinity who opposed the divorce and were ready to write against it[766].
Dr. Kynton seems to have been on the same side at first[767]; Archbishop
Warham complained of his having spread calumnious reports about himself
in connexion with the ‘King’s matter,’ and demanded his punishment. But it
is doubtful whether in the end Kynton had the courage of his opinions; he
was one of the committee of three appointed by the theological faculty to
decide the question with the assistance of thirty other members to be
nominated by the smaller committee[768]. This body subsequently issued, in
the name of the University, the qualified declaration in favour of the King,
the tenour of which is well-known.
The most active champion of the King’s cause was also a Minorite, Dr.
Nicholas de Burgo, a native of Italy, who enjoyed the patronage of Cardinal
Wolsey[769]. The unpopularity of the divorce, among those who were guided
by their sentiments rather than by their personal interests, is shown by the
treatment he received at Oxford. He was pelted with stones in the street, and
the good women of the town would have ‘foyled’ him ‘if their handys might
have served their harts’[770]. In retaliation the friar caused about thirty

women to be locked up in Bocardo for three days and nights[771]. As we
shall see later on, his services did not go unrewarded[772]. The position of
Friar Nicholas, however, was exceptional, and his action cannot be regarded
as representative of the feelings of the Oxford Convent.
The causes which led to the dissolution of the monasteries do not concern
us here. The friaries were not included in the Act of 1536 for the abolition
of the lesser monasteries; they possessed as a rule no estates except the site
on which they were built, and the gains to be derived from their
disendowment were perhaps regarded as insufficient compensation for the
odium which the measure would necessarily involve. The first blow had
already fallen upon the Observant Friars, the fearless champions of the
legality of the Queen Katharine’s marriage and of the Papal supremacy. The
conventuals were left alone till Henry decided on the general suppression of
the religious houses throughout England. The object of the royal party was
then to obtain what was called a ‘voluntary’ surrender of their property from
the members of each religious community; and among those who had the
courage to offer opposition were many houses of Franciscans, ‘with hom,’
writes the Bishop of Dover, ‘in every place I have moche besynes’[773]. But
among these we cannot reckon the convent at Oxford.
In 1535 Cromwell sent his agent, Layton, and others, to Oxford to reform
the University. After abolishing the study of the schoolmen[774], the visitors
proceeded to deal with the religious students[775]. For the reform of the
monasteries, they were armed with a set of eighty-six articles of inquiry and
twenty-five injunctions[776], the real though not avowed object of which
was to make monastic life unbearable and so to prepare the way for
‘voluntary’ surrenders[777].
‘We have further,’ writes Dr. Layton to Cromwell on the 12th of
September[778], ‘in visitynge the religiouse studenttes, emongyste all other
injunctions, adjoyned that none of them for no manner of cause shall cum
within any taverne, in, alhowse, or any other howse whatsoever hit be,
within the towne and the suburbs of the same, upon payne onse so taken by
day or by nyght, to be sent imediatly home to his cloister whereas he was
professede. Withoute doubte we here say this acte to be gretly lamentede of
all the duble honeste women of the towne, and specially of ther laundres
that now may not onse entre within the gaittes, and muche lesse within ther

chambers, wherunto they wer ryght well accustomede. I doubt not but for
this thyng onely the honeste matrones will sew unto yowe for a redresse.’
It is probable, that, between this time and the summer and autumn of 1538,
when the general dissolution of the friaries took place, many of the Oxford
Franciscans had left their house[779]. The Friary, it will be seen, was
wretchedly poor and in a ruinous condition; ‘and few do geve any almys to
them’[780]. The commission to visit the Oxford friaries in 1538 consisted of
Dr. John London, the mayor (Mr. Banaster) and ‘master aldermen’
(apparently Mr. Pye and Mr. Fryer). On the 8th of July[781], Dr. London
writes to Cromwell that he and his fellow-commissioners have been ‘at all
the places of the fryers in Oxforde,’ and wishing ‘to know your lordeships
pleasur’ on certain doubtful points, he proceeds to give an account of his
work.
‘At Mr. Pyei’s comyng home Mr. Maier and Mr. ffryer wer at London, and
forasmoch as we dowbtyd of ther spedy comyng home, and Mr. Pye and I
wer creadable informyd that it wasse time to be doing among the friers[782],
we went to euery place of them and tok such a vew[783] and stay among
them as the tyme wolde permytt.’
After visiting the Carmelites and Austin Friars, they came to the Grey
Friars.
‘The Grey ffryers,’ continues London[784], ‘hathe prayty Ilondes behynde
ther howse well woddyde, and the waters be thers also. They haue oon fayre
orchard and sondry praty gardens and lodginges. It ys a great hoge howce
conteynyng moche ruinose bylding. They haue impledged and solde most
of ther plate and juellys forcyd by necessitie as they do saye, and that
remaynyth ys in the bill. Ther ornamentes of ther church be olde and litill
worthe. Ther other stuff of howsholde ys ybill worth x łi. They haue taken
vppe the pypes of ther condytt lately and haue cast them in sowys to the
nombre lxxij, wherof xij be sold for the costes in taking vppe of the pypes,
as the warden saith. The residew we haue putt in safe garde. Butt we haue
nott yet weyd them. And ther ys yet in the erthe remaynyng moch of the
condytt nott taken vppe. In ther groves the wynde hathe blown down many
great trees, wich do remayn upon the ground. Thees freers do receyve yerly

owt of thexchequer of the Kinges almys l markes. Thys howse ys all
coveryde wt slatte and no ledde.’
Before August the 14th the doctor had sent up the plate of the Oxford
friaries to Cromwell’s servant in London, Mr. Thacker, and received from
him ‘a bill indentyd conteynyng the parcels of the sayd plate wt the nombre
of ownces.’[785] The following is the list of

Juelles and plate in the grey ffryers[786].
Imp’mis a crosse of sylu’ and gylt liiij vnc’.
A chales all gylt xiiij vnc’.
A nother all gylt xv vnc’.
A nother p̱ cell gylt xiij vnc’.
xiiij vnc’ et
A nother chales p̱ cell gylt
di.
A pyxe of sylu’ gyldyd wt owt a cou’ xv vnc’.
A sensar of sylu’ waynge xxxij vnc’.
A payer of small cruettes gylted ij vnc’ iij qrt’.
V masers olde wt bonds of sylu’ weyng wt the
lxxxxij vnc’.
trees[787].
A black horne wt sylu’ bonde and fot weyng wt the x vnc’ et di.
horne
iij dosyn sponys xxxiij vnc’.
A knappe[788] of the cou’ of a maser ij vnc’.

The treatment of the friars themselves was a more complicated problem. All
of them seem to have been willing to become secular priests, and London
urged
‘that with spede we may haue ther capacyties, ffor the longer they tary the
more they will wast[789].’
On the 14th of August[790] he complains that

‘as yet we haue nott the capacities and therfor be at the chardge in fyndyng
them mete and drink.’
On the 31st of August, again, he writes to Cromwell from Oxford[791]:
‘I have causyd all our fower ordre of fryers to change ther cotes, and have
despacchide them as well as I can till they may receyve ther capacities, for
the wiche I have now agen sent uppe thys berar doctor Baskerfelde[792], to
whom I do humblie besek your lordeschippe to stonde gudde lorde. He ys
an honest man, and causyd all hys howse to surrendre the same and to
chaunge ther papistical garmentes. I wrote to your lordeschippe specially
for hym to have in hys capacytie an expresse licens to dwell in Oxford,
altho he wer benefycyd; and your lordeschipp then wrote that yt wasse your
pleasur he and all other shulde have ther capacities according to ther desyer,
and for that thys man is now an humble sutar unto your lordeschippe. He
hath be a visitar of dyvers places wiche they do call custodies, and knowith
many thinges as well in London as otherwise, wiche he hath promised me
to declare unto your lordeschippe, if it be your pleasur he schall so do.’
The list of Oxford Grey Friars who ‘wold haue ther capacytis’ which was
sent to Cromwell[793], contains eighteen names, thirteen of them being
priests, one subdeacon, and four not in holy orders. The names are: Edward
Baskerfelde, Warden, S.T.P.[794]; Friars Brian Sanden, Richard Roper, B.D.,
Rodulph Kyrswell, Robert Newman, William Brown, John Covire (or
Conire or Comre), James Cantwell, Thomas Cappes, John Stafforde Schyer
(?), William Bowghnell, James Smyzth, Thomas Wythman, priests; Friar
John Olliff, subdeacon; and Friars Symon Ludforth, Thomas Barly, William
Cok, and John Cok, non infra sacros.
It is not often possible to trace the subsequent career of the friars when they
had been turned adrift on the world. The monks as a rule received pensions,
and the entries respecting the payment of these in the Ministers’ Accounts
and other records, afford some clue to their fate. The Mendicants except in a
few isolated cases received no pensions. Dr. London in his letter of the 8th
of July[795] asked Cromwell
‘what reward euery freer shall have ...[796] at ther departinge,’

but the question no doubt refers merely to the gift of a few shillings, which
was usually made to each friar on his dismissal. No instance occurs in the
records of a pension having been paid to any of the Grey Friars who were at
Oxford at the time of the suppression[797]. It is probable that Baskerfeld,
who was an important person in the University, received a benefice with
license to live in Oxford. Robert Newman seems also to have been
presented to a living[798]. But the career of only one of these eighteen friars
can be traced with any certainty. Simon Ludford, a native of Bedford,
became an apothecary in London. On November 6, 1553, he supplicated for
the degree of M.B. at Oxford after six years’ study in the medical faculty.
On November 27, he obtained the degree and was admitted to practise. The
College of Physicians remonstrated with the University and recommended
that the degree should be revoked on the ground of Ludford’s ignorance.
Though the University refused to withdraw its license, the ex-friar
proceeded to Cambridge, but the Physicians hastened to warn the
authorities there against him. They had, they wrote to the University,
already examined Ludford ‘on the 17th day before the Calends of March,
1553’ (?), and, finding him completely ignorant of medicine, philosophy,
and the liberal sciences, and distinguished only by ‘blind audacity,’
unanimously voted against his admission. Ludford left Cambridge, but
persevered. In May 1560, he supplicated for the degree of M.D. at Oxford,
stating that he had long practised in London by permission of the London
College of Physicians. In July he incepted as M.D. of Oxford. In April 1563
he was made fellow of the College of Physicians, and he was censor of the
same College in 1564, 1569, and 1572.[799]
We turn now to the Minorites who had studied at Oxford, but who were
living in other convents at the time of the dissolution. Of these a
considerable number obtained benefices[800], a few even rising to positions
of some importance in the Church[801]. But what proportion these
successful cases bore to the unsuccessful cannot be even approximately
ascertained; it would naturally be higher among friars who had received a
university education than among the common herd. Yet it is unlikely that a
majority even of the former were presented to livings. The number of
disbanded monks and friars seeking employment as priests must have been
very large, and at the same time the demand for priests was growing less
and less.[802] Some of the friars probably drifted into secular employments;

others perhaps joined the ranks of the ‘sturdy beggars’ of whom so much is
heard in the sixteenth century. It can hardly be doubted but that the lot of
many was one of hardship and suffering.
In the eyes of Cromwell and his royal master the only question of real
importance was the most advantageous disposal of the property. The
buildings of the Grey Friars were of little account, and the convent was
among those
‘howses of freres that have no substance of lead, save only some of them
haue smale gutters[803].’
The site, however, was of considerable value, Dr. London was anxious that
it should be secured for the city; and his letter[804] gives a curious picture of
the state of Oxford at the time of the dissolution.
‘It ys rumoryd her that dyuers of the garde do intende to begge thees
howsys of the Kinges hyghnes, and that with other consideracions moveth
me now to be an humble petitioner vnto your lordeschippe for my neybours.
We haue in Oxforde two of the Kinges grace’s seruantes Mr. Banaster and
Mr. Pye, two as burgerly and as honest men as lyveth in any town and hathe
no thing to lyve vpon, nother farmes abrode nor fees saving oonly ther
wages of the Kinges grace iiijd. a daye. Mr. Banaster ys now mayer, and
Mr. Pye hath be mayer, to hys great chardge.’
The writer then urges that Mr. Banaster should have the site (‘cyte’) and
profits of the White Friars, Mr. Pye those of the fair of the Austin Friars.
‘Mr. Pye specially hath be diligent to bring vnto the Kinges grace’s hondes
thees howses, and therefor I besek your gudd lordeschipp to be gudd lord
vnto hym. And syns Mr. Mayer com home he ys as diligent as maye be and
so is Mr. ffryer.’
London goes on to plead for his ‘neybours of Oxford,’
‘seying so gudd an occasion ys come wherin your lordeschipp may do vnto
them the hyest benefytt that euer dydd honorable man. The greatest
occasion of the povertie of thys town ys the payment of ther fee-farme. ffor
thys ys customablie seen, that such as befor they haue be bayliffes hath be
prety occupyers, if in ther yere corn be nott at a hie price, then they be nott

able to pay ther fee-farme. And for the worschipp of ther town they must
that yere kepe the better howsys, fest ther neybours and wer better apparell,
wich maketh them so pore that few of them can recouer agen. If by your
gudde lordeschips mediation the town myȝt haue the grey and black fryers
growndes after the Kinges grace hath be answerd for the wodd and
buyldinges with other thynges upon the same, and lykewyse the cytes of the
Whyte and austen fryers after the decese of Mr. Banester and Mr. Pye; It
wolde mervelosly helpe the town, and geve them great occasion to fall to
clothynge, ffor vpon the grey and black fryers water be certen convenyent
and commodiose places to sett fulling mylles vpon, and so people myȝt be
sett awork. Now the baylys forcyd by necessitie taketh such tolls of such as
passith by the town with catell or any maner of cariage as makith men lothe
to com herbye; and Oxford ys no great thorowfare whereby moche resort
schuld helpe them. Thys benefytt shuld lytill hynder the kinges maiestie and
mervelosly helpe thys pouer town; and your lordeschipp schuld do a
blessyd dede to helpe so many pouer men wich by ther fee-farme be notably
poverischyd. And yet the Kinges grace schuld save a C markes yerly in hys
cofers by reason of the grey and black fryers wich hath euery of them C
(sic) markes by yere.’
The plan here sketched out, creditable as it is to its author, was not carried
into effect. On August 10th, 1540, William Frewers and John Pye of
Oxford, obtained a lease of the house and site of the Grey Friars, together
with the grove containing by estimation five acres, for twenty-one years, at
a rent of 20s. a year—half the amount of the rent which the same persons
paid for the Black Friars[805]. Much of the Grey Friars’ property was
expressly excepted from this lease; namely, the close called ‘le
Churcheyarde’ now held by Richard Gunter of Oxford at an annual rent of
3s. 4d., the orchard or garden called ‘Paradise,’ and the garden called
‘Boteham,’ now held by William Thomas at an annual rent of 6s. 8d.
Further all large trees and shrubs were reserved to the King, together with
all those buildings within the precincts of the two friaries ‘which the King
had commanded to be levelled or taken away.’
In 1544 the tenants seem to have opened negotiations for the purchase of
the property. In the official ‘particulars’ sent up to the royal commissioners
we read:

‘These houses of ffryers ar wythin the towne of Oxford and as I haue lernyd
they ar not nyghe eny of the Kinges houses neyther hys graces parkes
fforestes and chase by seven myles. And what ffyne wylbe gyuen ffor the
same I know not neyther can lerne. And they ar the ffermers them selues yt
desyreth to by the premysses[806].’
The price which the tenants offered was probably unsatisfactory; the
impecunious Pye with his wages of 4d. a day can hardly have had a chance
against wealthier speculators in monastic lands. In 1544 a successful bid
was made by Richard Andrewes of Hales, Esquire (Glouc.), one of the
largest of these speculators[807], who as usual was acting in partnership with
another, in this case John Howe. On July 14th, 1544, the King granted to
these two, in consideration of £1094 3s. 2d. paid by Richard Andrewes,
various monastic lands in the counties of Derby, Middlesex, Oxford, &c.,
including the sites of the Black and Grey Friars in Oxford[808].
‘We give also and for the aforesaid consideration by these presents concede
to the said Richard Andrewes and John Howe, the whole site of the house
late of the friars Minors, commonly called “les Grey ffreers” within the
town of Oxford now dissolved. And also our whole grove of land and wood
with its appurtenances containing by estimation five acres of land, now or
late in the tenure or occupation of William ffrewers and John Pye or their
assigns; and our whole close of land called ‘le Churcheyarde’ with its
appurtenances, now or late in the tenure or occupation of James Gunter or
his assigns; and our whole garden or orchard called “Paradyse,” and our
whole garden called Bateham or Boteham, now or late in the tenure or
occupation of William Thomas or his assigns, with all and each of their
appurtenances situated within the town of Oxford, lately belonging to the
priory or house of the friars Minors ...; and all our houses, buildings,
stables, granaries, curtilages, gardens (ortos), orchards, gardens (gardina),
waters, ponds, vineyards, land and soil whatsoever with their appurtenances
lying within the said boundary of the house of the friars Minors.... Which
site of the late house of friars Minors and all the aforesaid houses,
buildings, gardens, orchards, &c., belonging thereto, now amount
(extenduntur) to the clear annual value of 30s.... We except however always
and totally reserve out of the present concession, all the bells and the whole
of the lead and glass on the said houses of the friars Minors and Preachers,
except the lead and glass in the gutters and windows of the houses or

mansions of the same friars: and also in like manner all the buildings and
structures of the late churches, cloisters, refectories, dormitories, and
chapterhouses of the said friars.’
All the property granted was to be held by Richard Andrewes and John
Howe and the heirs and assigns of Richard Andrewes, in chief, ‘for the
service of the twentieth part of one knight’s fee.’ An annual rent was to be
paid to the King from each parcel of property, the rent of the site of the
Friars Minors being 3s., that of the Friars Preachers 4s.
The purchase was purely a matter of speculation, and the next month
(August 26th, 1544), Andrewes and Howe obtained from the King, for a
fine of 9s., license to alienate the site of the Grey Friars, with the grove,
churchyard, Paradise, and Boteham, and the buildings, except those already
reserved for the King, to Richard Gunter, alderman of Oxford, and Joanna
his wife, and the heirs and assigns of Richard Gunter, to be held by them
‘for the services due thence to us, our heirs, and successors[809].’ It does not
appear whether the leases of Frewers, Pye, and Thomas, were cancelled or
allowed to run their course.
The subsequent history of the property is obscure, and probably would not
repay an exhaustive investigation. Wood states that the land
‘being shifted through severall hands doth now acknowledg also severall
owners[810].’
Part of it was ‘now inhabited by tanners[811].’ The island or grove on the
south of Trill Mill stream belonged
‘to Sir William Moorton, Kt., Judge of the King’s Bench, in right of his
wife Anne, daughter and heir of John Smyth of Oxford, Gent[812].’
Writing about a century later, Peshall states that the site
‘now forms the messuage or Tenement and large Yard of Charles Collins,
Gent; the Garden, Orchard, and Tenement of Swithin Adee, M.D., late Sir
James Cotter’s, Bart., and the large Garden and Orchard called Paradise
Garden. The Island in their possession ... is occupied by Mr. Shirley, which
serves partly for a Tan Yard and Buildings necessary thereto[813].’

In a short time little was left of the buildings—so complete was the work of
destruction. ‘The trees were soon cut down, all the greens trod under foot,
the church thrown down, and the stones, with the images and monuments of
the greatest value, scattered about[814].’ The name only survived; Agas in
his map (1578) puts the Graie Friers where the house of the Black Friars
stood. ‘The ruins of this college are gone to ruine,’ wrote Wood, ‘and
almost lodged in obscurity[815]:’ and the ‘scanty fragments’ (rudera
paucula) which were visible to Hearne and Parkinson as they walked
towards the Watergate[816] have long since vanished. Even the use to which
the materials were put is unknown. Some of the stones form no doubt the
foundation-work of many houses in St. Ebbe’s: but while something
definite is known about the materials of the Houses of the other Mendicant
Orders, the records are silent respecting the greatest of the friaries[817].

PART II.
BIOGRAPHICAL AND BIBLIOGRAPHICAL
NOTICES.

CHAPTER I.

CUSTODIANS AND WARDENS.
1. W. of Esseby, Warden and Custos, c. 1225.
—2. E. de Merc, Warden, 1237.—3. P.
of Tewkesbury, Custos, 1236-1248.—4.
J. of Stamford, Custos, 1253.—5.
Martin, Warden, c. 1250.—6. Adam of
Warminster, Warden, 1269.—7. J.
Codyngton, Warden, 1300.—8. J. of
Okehampton, Warden, 1340.—9. R.
Clyff, Custos, 1465.—10. R. Salford,
Warden, 1488.—11. W. Vavasour,
Warden, c. 1500.—12. R. Burton,
Warden (and Custos), 1508.—13. W.
Goodfield, Warden, before 1513.—14. J.
Harvey, Warden, 1513.—15. E.
Baskerfield, Warden (and Custos), 1534.
Unlike the Abbots and Priors of the religiosi possessionati, the heads of the
Mendicant Houses required no royal assent to their appointment. Their
names consequently do not occur in the royal records, and to this fact is due
the incompleteness of the following list of the custodians and wardens of
the Grey Friars at Oxford. It is a noteworthy if not surprising fact, that not a
single original work by any of these men can now be found.
William of Esseby (perhaps Ashby in Norfolk)[818], the first warden, was
one of the four clerks who came to England with Agnellus in 1224; he was
then a young man and a novice, having recently joined the Order in
France[819], and only assumed the habit of a professus when he became
warden at Oxford[820]. He was among the first three Minorites authorized to
preach in England[821].

When the English Province was divided into custodies (c. 1226?), he was
made custodian of Oxford[822]. Afterwards he was sent to found the convent
at Cambridge, and Eccleston draws a strange picture of him solemnly
chanting the service, with one other friar and a crippled novice, in the
wooden shed which served for a chapel[823]. Later William is heard of at
Northampton[824]. About 1238, he was sent by Friar Wygmund, the German
visitator of England, to visit Ireland; his mission here proved as abortive as
that of the German in England; on his return he went to Cologne to join
Wygmund[825]. He had ceased to be warden or custodian of Oxford before
1237[826]. He was alive when William of Nottingham became Provincial
Minister, and died ‘after many years’ at London[827].
Eccleston gives him a high character. He was specially distinguished for his
obedience.
‘When Friar Gregory, the Provincial Minister of France, asked him whether
he would like to go to his native land, he said, he did not know what he
would like, because his will was not his own, but the Minister’s; so,
whatever the Minister would, he would[828].’
By his tact he did much towards winning for his Order the affection of the
world, and he was instrumental in leading many fit persons of various ranks
and ages ‘to the way of salvation[829].’
Cambridge Univ. Library, MS. Ii I. 24, p. 332. seq. (sec. xiv) contains a
sermon by the ‘Prior de Essebi de artificioso modo predicandi,’ and
other sermons perhaps by the same author. Tanner and others suggest
that this Essebi may be the Franciscan: but ‘Prior’ was a title unknown
in the Franciscan Order. The author was probably a Prior of Canons
Ashby.
Eustace de Merc was a member of the Oxford convent in the lifetime of
Agnellus, and had license to hear confessions; he was warden at the time of
the visitatorial chapter held by Friar Wygred or Wygmund in 1237-8. On
this occasion many accusations were brought against him, in consequence
of which he was for a day and a half excluded from the chapter; the charges
are not specified and do not seem to have been proved. After fulfilling the
duties of warden for a long time, he became custodian of York. The date of
his death is unknown.

While he always showed to others ‘the sweetness of an angelic affection,’
he subjected himself until the end of his life to the severest discipline; even
in his earlier years, his fasts and vigils and self-inflicted stripes endangered
his health, and called forth the remonstrances of his superiors[830].
Peter of Tewkesbury. It is uncertain whether ‘Friar Peter, custodian of
Oxford’ is to be identified with Peter of Tewkesbury; but a comparison of
the dates, so far as they can be ascertained, brings out nothing inconsistent
with this supposition, and we shall put the facts about both of them together.
Peter of Tewkesbury was warden of London about 1234; about this time he
went to Rome with Agnellus and some Friars Preachers on behalf of the
English prelates[831]. Agnellus confessed to him on his death-bed and
constituted him his vicar[832]. When Albert of Pisa was Provincial, Friar
Peter was custodian of Oxford; he held the office for twelve years (1236-
48?)[833]. During the generalship of Haymo, ‘Friar Peter, custodian of
Oxford’ was one of the three friars chosen for the English province to note
doubtful points in the Rule[834]. In 1245 he again appears as custodian;
Adam mentions having written a detailed account to him about the
proceedings at or before the Council of Lyons[835]. Peter of Tewkesbury was
at the general chapter of the friars at Genoa in 1244, and remained
afterwards to obtain and take back two Papal bulls about the Friars
Preachers and Minors, evidently the revocation of the bull providing that no
Minorite should receive the obligati of the Preachers into his Order[836].
When John of Stamford fell ill on his return from Lyons, Peter of
Tewkesbury was sent to Mantes to come back with Adam Marsh, at
Grostete’s request[837]. In 1250 he was minister of Cologne[838]. It was
probably in the next year that he was elected fifth Provincial of England
after the death of William of Nottingham[839]: he was succeeded by John of
Stamford about 1256 or 1257[840]. He was an intimate friend of Robert
Grostete, ‘from whom he often heard many secrets of wisdom.’[841]
Eccleston says of him:
‘Friar Peter of Tewkesbury, minister of Germany, with God’s grace
defended the state of the Order against the King, legate, and many false
brethren, to such an extent that the fame of the fact spread to many
provinces, and his zeal of truth was invincibly proved[842].’
He was buried at Bedford[843].

John of Stamford, custodian of Oxford[844], was a man of great importance
among the friars. He was at the council of Lyons in 1245 as socius of Adam
Marsh[845]. The Pope had some thoughts of sending him with others on an
embassy to the Chorasmeni, Tartars, and Saracens, who had attacked the
Holy Land, but the plan was not carried out[846]. On his return, he was taken
ill at Beaune, and was tended by Adam Marsh[847]. John of Stamford was
one of the three friars to whom the general entrusted the confirmation of the
election of William of Nottingham’s successor in the office of Provincial
Minister (1251)[848]. Some time after 1245 he became custodian of Oxford;
he held the office in 1253 when Thomas of York incepted[849]. He joined
about this time with Adam Marsh and Thomas of York in a petition to the
Provincial, begging for mercy for Hugh Cote, probably a lay brother, who
had stolen three horses of great value, and then repented[850]. He succeeded
Peter of Tewkesbury as provincial minister about 1256[851]. His friendship
with Adam Marsh lasted to the end of the latter’s life[852]: feeling that his
last days were approaching, Adam begged Bonaventura, then General, to
send to him John of Stamford, the English Provincial, who was at this time
(1257), apparently abroad[853]. As Provincial he procured an endowment
(20s. per annum) for St. Owen’s Church in London, the parish in which the
Minorites then had their house[854]. He is said to have died in 1264, but
there is no good authority for the statement[855]. He was buried at Lynn,
with which place he seems to have had some previous connexion: Brewer
calls him warden of Lynn[856].
Martin is mentioned in two letters from Adam Marsh to ‘W., Minister of
England’ as warden of Oxford; but the superscription is untrustworthy and
the date of the letters uncertain[857]. This Martin may have been identical
with the ‘Frater Martinus senex’ (mentioned by Eccleston), who established
the convent at Shrewsbury, and delighted in the recollection of the
hardships and poverty which he had then experienced[858]. A Martin de
Barton, who was also known to Eccleston, and had often seen St. Francis,
came to England in the early years of the Order, and was afterwards vicar of
the English Provincial and filled many other offices[859]. When custodian of
York, Martin de Barton enforced the strictest poverty, only allowing so
many friars to live in any place, as could be supported by mendicancy alone
without incurring debts[860].

Adam of Warminster was warden in 1269; he took part in a controversy
with the Dominicans at Oxford in that year, defending his Order against the
charge of being ‘receivers of money[861].’
John de Codyngton was warden in 1300, when he received license from
the Bishop to hear confessions in the Archdeaconry of Oxford[862].
John de Okehampton was warden in 1340; all that is known of him will
be found in the Appendix B.
Richard Clyff was custodian in 1465 and 1466. In the latter year he sued
John Broghton, sheriff of Kent for a royal debt. He was sometime vice-
warden of London and was buried in the church of the Minorites there[863].
Richard Salford was warden in 1488 and 1489; he recovered debts from
Sir John Paston, sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, and Sir Edmund
Bedyngfeld, sheriff of the same counties; the records of these suits contain
the only notices of him now remaining[864].
William Vavasor was studying at Oxford and transcribing philosophical
treatises in 1490 and 1491[865]. He incepted as D.D. in 1500, and was
warden of the convent about the same time[866]. In Thomas Cromwell’s list
of learned persons not living in Oxford (a. d. 1531) is the name of ‘Dr.
Vavysor, Grey Friar at...’[867]. At the dissolution he was warden of the Grey
Friars at York[868], and was one of the few Mendicants who received a
pension; the amount was £5 a year[869].
Robert Burton was warden on April 12, 1508, when he applied to the
Chancellor’s Court to recover a debt.
‘Eodem die dedimus terminum domino Joanni Gardener principali aule
bovine ad satisfaciendum fratri Roberto Burton gardiano fratrum Minorum
xxvs viiid sibi debitos in fine quatuor septimarum,’ &c.[870]
As B.D. he supplicated for D.D. on March 8th, 1507/8 after studying for
twenty years at Oxford and Cambridge, preaching two University sermons
at Oxford, and six at Paul’s Cross, &c.; the grace was conceded on
condition that he should respond once more[871]. Afterwards he became
regent of the Franciscan Schools in London. The register of the Grey Friars,

London, notes among those buried in the chapel of All Saints in the
Franciscan church,
frater Robertus Burton sacre theologie prof(essor quondam) Regens loci,
qui obiit 8o die mensis Januarii a. d. 1522[872].
Walter Goodfield was warden shortly before 1513; as warden he leased
one of the friary gardens to Ric. Leke, brewer[873]. From the University
Register[874], it appears that on Nov. 27, 1506, he supplicated to be admitted
to opponency and to read the sentences, after studying twelve years in logic,
philosophy, and theology; on May 10, 1507, in making the same
supplication, he stated that he had studied the same subjects fourteen years.
He was admitted to oppose on Dec. 10, 1507. On June 3, 1508, he
supplicated as B.D. for D.D.
‘This grace was granted on condition that he has studied twelve years in
logic, philosophy, and theology, and that he proceed before Easter, and that
he preach once ‘preter formam,’ after taking his degree, and read one book
of the sentences publicly and gratis.’
On March 19, 1509/10, he was allowed to count a sermon to be preached on
Ash Wednesday as his examinatory sermon. On May 12, 1510, he was
licensed in theology. On June 27, 1510, he was dispensed ‘pro suis lecturis
minutis.’ On July 1, he was admitted D.D.; on Oct. 28, 1510, he was with
three others appointed a judge to examine a sentence passed on Thomas
Foster by the commissary[875]; and on Dec. 10, he was dispensed from his
necessary regency, possibly owing to his duties as warden. He seems to
have become warden of the London convent after this[876]. He died on the
6th of May, 1521, and was buried in the chapel of All Saints, in the Grey
Friars Church, London[877].
John Harvey succeeded Goodfield as warden; he held the office in Feb.
1513/4[878], Feb. 1514/5[879], and probably for many years afterwards. He
had ceased to be warden in 1529, when he was required by the vice-warden
or sub-warden John Bacheler, in the name of the then warden, to answer
certain charges made against him respecting his administration[880]. The
following details are known about his scholastic career; he was admitted to
oppose in theology Dec. 6, 1514, and admitted B.D. on Jan. 20, 1514/5; he

was still B.D. in 1529; one of the same name took the degree of B. Can. L.
on April 3, 1530, but he is not described as a friar[881].
Edward Baskerfild was probably the immediate successor of John Harvey.
In Jan. 1527/8 he held some office, being then ‘in London on the business
of his house’ and likely to stay there some months[882]; he is described as
warden in 1533, as custos fratrum minorum Universitatis Oxon’ in
1534[883], and he was warden at the time of the dissolution.
He supplicated for B.D. on April 12, 1526, after
‘studying logic, philosophy, and theology for thirteen years, and preaching
some sermons at Exeter and Oxford,’
was admitted to oppose on June 13, and became B.D. on Feb. 18,
1526/7[884]. He supplicated for D.D. on Dec. 9, 1531, and March 5, 1531/2,
after sixteen years’ study; and became D.D. on July 8, 1532[885]. He had
previously obtained a reduction of his composition on inception first to five,
and then to four marks;
‘Causa est quod est pauperior quam ut possit eam summam pecunie
(quinque marcas) solvere[886].’
In Oct. 1532, he was dispensed from his necessary regency. In 1533 we find
him at Exeter, trying to extract from Thomas Benet a recantation of his
heresies[887].
He acted as deputy of the commisary, or vice-chancellor, in 1534, 1535,
1536, and 1537[888]. In this capacity he sometimes held his court in the
Franciscan convent, as, for instance, when investigating the charges of
immorality against Friar Arthur[889]. His pecuniary position seems to have
improved: he kept a horse in 1534[890], and in 1537, one Robert Symon was
admitted to the privileges of the University as servant of Dr. Baskerfild[891].
At the dissolution he made his peace with the visitors by causing his house
to surrender at once[892]. Dr. London sent him to Thomas Cromwell (Aug.
31, 1538), to obtain the ‘capacities’ for the Oxford friars, and begged
Cromwell to allow him to live in Oxford ‘altho he wer benefycyd.’ As
‘visitar of dyvers places wiche they do call custodies,’

he possessed information concerning the friars in London and elsewhere
which might be useful to the King’s agents, and which he was willing to
impart to them. He appears to have accompanied Dr. London on his
visitation after the dissolution of the friars at Oxford, and we find him on
Jan. 3, 1539, receiving in conjunction with the doctor, the surrender of the
Black Friars of Derby[893]. The name is spelt in a variety of ways, e.g.
Baskarwild, Bascafyld, &c.; a fifteenth century MS. in the Bodleian (Laud.
Lat. 114, § 3), containing Cantica Sacra, belonged to Edward Baskervile,
D.D.
Note. Wood places Herveius de Saham among the wardens of the Grey
Friars (a. d. 1285). This is a mistake based on a misunderstanding of the
following passage in Peckham’s Register (p. 895):
‘Et ne pro defectu acquietantiae solutionem dictae pecuniae retardetis,
damus magistro Herveo de Saham, auditori compoti vestri de bonis dicti
defuncti, Oxoniae commoranti et regenti, et gardiano Fratrum Minorum de
eadem, tenore praesentium potestatem ut soluta dicta pecunia in forma
praefata, plenam vobis faciant acquietantiam de eadem’ (May 6, 1285).

CHAPTER II.

LECTORS OR REGENT MASTERS OF THE
FRANCISCANS.
The following sixty-seven names are classed together under a separate
heading simply because they are found in a list in an old manuscript. The
list is evidently intended to include all the Regent Masters of the Friars
Minors at Oxford[894] in chronological order; it seems to break off about the
year 1350. Whether it is complete up to that date may be doubted; but no
contemporary, or nearly contemporary, notice has been found of any Friar
Minor Regent in Theology or D.D. of Oxford before 1351, whose name
does not occur in this list[895].
The list is found in two MSS:—
I. British Museum; Cotton Nero A IX, fol. 77 a-b, in Eccleston’s Chronicle.
Names 1-5 are in the same hand as the rest of the MS.; 6-21 in a hand rather
larger but not perceptibly later. On the reverse of the leaf, they are
continued in a later fourteenth century hand which ends at the 58th name;
then 59-66 have been added not much later (the ink has faded a good deal in
this part); the last name is in a later hand, probably fifteenth century.
II. Phillipps, MS. 3119, fol. 76 (at Thirlestaine House). Names 1-21 are in
the same hand as the MS., i.e. the text of Eccleston’s Chronicle; another
scribe has added names 22-49 inclusive; then the names are continued in
another hand to Laurence Briton, where the list ends. This MS. omits Henry
Cruche and Walter de Chauton, so that Laurence Briton is called the 53rd
master instead of the 55th.

Lectors.
1. Adam Marsh or de Marisco was born probably at the end of the 12th
century in the diocese of Bath[896]. He was educated at Oxford, where he

studied under Robert Grostete[897], whose affectionate interest in him dated
from his early years[898]. His brother Robert was made Archdeacon of
Oxford by Grostete in 1248 and other members of the family were in the
bishop’s service[899]. Adam’s uncle, Richard de Marisco, Bishop of
Durham, from 1217 to 1226, gave him a living near Wearmouth, which he
held for three years[900], and bequeathed to him his library in 1226[901]. At
this time Adam was a Master, probably of Arts. Soon afterwards, at the
instigation of his friend and pupil[902] Adam of Oxford, who had recently
become a Minorite, he gave up ‘all worldly greatness and a large
income[903]’ to enter the Franciscan Order at Worcester, ‘through zeal for
greater poverty[904].’ He is said to have been appointed by the General
Chapter socius of St. Anthony of Padua, the first theological student in the
Order. The two then proceeded, according to the same authority, to study
under the Abbat of St. Andrew’s at Vercelli, where they made such progress
in five years that the Abbat confessed that his pupils had become his
teachers[905]. In 1230 St. Anthony and Adam Marsh are said to have headed
the opposition to the relaxations which Elias was attempting to bring into
the Order[906]; but this tradition is probably unfounded; Eccleston says
nothing about it[907]. After his entry into the Order, Adam probably resided
for the most part at Oxford, where Grostete was then lecturing to the
Franciscans. Wood asserts that the latter presided at his inception and made
the customary speech in praise of the inceptor at the ceremony[908]; but the
statement, though probable enough in itself, lacks authority and seems to
have originated from a confusion between Adam and Robert Marsh[909]: it
is not unlikely that Adam received his theological degree abroad. There is
no direct evidence of his having lectured on theology to the friars at Oxford
before 1252[910], but there can be no doubt that he began to do so not later
than 1247 (when Thomas Wallensis was elected Bishop of St. David’s), and
he probably delivered lectures long before. He was certainly before this
time one of the recognised leaders of the English Franciscans[911]. He was
on a commission of three elected by the English province to report on the
Rule when Haymo was general (1239-1244), and recommended that no
change should be made in the statutes of St. Francis[912]. He wrote a solemn
exhortation in the name of the English Minorites to Boniface of Savoy on
his consecration to the Archbishopric of Canterbury in 1245[913]. William of
Nottingham submitted to him the names of three friars from whom he was
to select one to act as Vicar in the Provincial Minister’s absence (1250?)

[914]. In his latter years he was one of the foremost men in the church. At the
instance of the Archbishop of Canterbury and for his use, he wrote an
address to the Pope on the occasion of Henry III taking the cross (1250)
[915]. He addressed a long letter of advice to St. Sewalus on his appointment
to the Archbishopric of York in 1255[916]. In the same year he was
nominated by Alexander IV to settle a dispute between the Bishop and the
Prior and Convent of Winchester[917]. He was on a Papal commission to try
a cause between the King and the Bishop of St. David’s, and between the
same bishop and the Abbat of Gloucester[918], and on another commission
appointed to examine the claims of Richard de Wiche to canonization[919].
He supported Grostete in his revolt against the scandalous nepotism of
Innocent IV[920]. At Oxford his character, learning, and friendship with the
great, gave him a very important position, and he acted as spokesman now
of the Franciscans, now of the whole University[921]. His fame was
European, and Grostete was afraid that the Parisians would secure him to
supply the place of Alexander of Hales (1245)[922]. Among his
correspondents and friends were many of the leading men of the age, such
as Walter de Cantilupe[923], Richard de Wiche, Walter de Merton, Richard
Earl of Cornwall, John of Parma, and Bonaventura. He assisted the
Archbishop of Canterbury in his visitation, and accompanied Grostete to the
Council of Lyons. At one time he is wanted to attend the Parliament at
London[924], at another he is summoned by the Queen to Reading, to treat of
‘matters touching the King and his heirs[925].’ He incurred the royal
displeasure by an outspoken sermon at Court (Oct. 1250)[926]; but his
advice was asked and listened to by the King who afterwards called him his
father[927].
‘When the Jews ... had transgressed against the peace of the kingdom, so
that both by the judgment of the King and the princes of the land they were
judged worthy of death, he alone resisted their arguments and forbade that
they should be put to death[928].’
In 1247 he was sent abroad with the Prior of the Dominicans on the King’s
business, and forty marks were granted to buy horses and harness for the
ambassadors[929]. In 1257 he was sent with Walter de Cantilupe, Bishop of
Worcester, on a similar mission, his expenses being paid out of the
treasury[930]. He was no less intimate with the Earl of Leicester than with
the Bishop of Lincoln. He lectures Eleanor de Montfort on her duties as a

mother and wife, and on her excess in dress[931]. He speaks equally plainly
to Simon de Montfort.
‘Better is a patient man than a strong man,’ he writes to the hot-headed earl,
‘and he who can rule his own temper than he who storms a city[932].’
The friar took a keen interest in his friend’s great deeds, recognised his
noble qualities, and the value of his efforts ‘to purge, illuminate, and
sanctify the church of God,’ and looked to him as the guardian of the public
weal[933]. He encouraged the Earl to go forward in his thankless task of
saving Gascony, and tried to win the King over to his side[934].
‘If,’ he writes to the Earl in 1250[935], ‘you have received the answers of
broken friendship and feigned affection, what else are you now suffering
than what you before expected? The clear circumspection of your wisdom
will remember, in how many conferences, after repeated and careful
examination, we drummed into each other’s ears the execrable
shamelessness of seductive cunning, such as we now see; although,
considering the trustworthiness of courageous fidelity, your wisdom did not
think proper to decline the danger of a truly grand exploit, for the imminent
suspicion merely of some stupendous dishonesty.’
With all his other occupations Adam Marsh did not neglect the poor and
oppressed; he begs Grostete to assist two poor scholars relatives of the
bishop; he writes to Thomas de Anesti on behalf of an able and honest
schoolmaster who is in want of the very necessaries of life; a weeping
widow brings her troubles to him, sure of sympathy and help[936]. His
health gave way under the strain of his manifold duties and the severe
discipline of his Order: he suffered from weakness of the eyes and other
infirmities[937]. In 1253 he lost his lifelong friend Grostete, who bequeathed
his library to the Oxford Franciscans out of love for Adam Marsh[938]. In
1256 the King and Archbishop of Canterbury tried to force him into the
bishopric of Ely; his rival Hugh Balsham who had been elected by the
chapter appealed to Rome and obtained a decision in his favour on Oct. 6,
1257. His candidature, probably none of his own seeking, seems to have
laid the friar open to a charge of worldly ambition, which must have
embittered his last days[939]. Feeling the end approaching, he wrote to
Bonaventura to send the Provincial John of Stamford,

‘by whom, through God’s blessing, I may be directed through things
transitory and my thoughts raised to things eternal[940].’
On Dec. 23, 1257, he was ordered abroad by the King[941]. He probably
died on Nov. 18[942], 1258, and was buried next to Grostete at Lincoln[943].
Besides the treatise mentioned below, none of his works remain[944] except
the letters, which, stilted and obscure in style, do not justify the title of
Doctor illustris, with which subsequent generations honoured him[945]. His
reputation as a philosopher and theologian must rest on the evidence of his
contemporaries, and on the greatness of the school which he did so much to
found. Matthew Paris calls him ‘literatus[946].’ Grostete found him
‘a true friend and faithful counsellor, respecting truth not vanity,’—‘a wise
man and a prudent, and fervent in zeal for the salvation of souls[947].’
His most famous pupil Roger Bacon had nothing but praise and admiration
for his master, who like Grostete was ‘perfect in all wisdom[948].’
Extant works:—Epistolae.
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Cotton Vitell. c. viii. (sec. xiii-xiv).
Bodl.: Digby 104, fol. 90 (sec. xiii), letter 147 only.
Edited by Brewer, Monumenta Franciscana, I (1858).
Pastorale excerptum (perhaps merely an extract from the letters).

MS. Vienna: Bibl. Palat. 4923, fol. 40b-42b (sec. xv).
2. Ralph de Colebruge was the second Franciscan master who lectured at
Oxford. He entered the Order while regent in theology at Paris, where he
won some fame; after finishing his course of lectures, he was appointed by
the General of the Order to rule in theology at Oxford, probably before
1250; he was still a novice when he entered on his duties at Oxford[949].
3. Eustace de Normaneville, probably took the Franciscan habit at Oxford
about 1250 or before[950]. His conversion was of peculiar importance to the
Order,

‘because he was noble and rich, and had laudably ruled in arts and decrees,
and had been Chancellor of Oxford[951], and was about to incept in
theology.’
It must have been soon after his entry that the friars at Norwich asked him
to become their lecturer. Adam Marsh was deputed by the Provincial to
make the proposal to him. Eustace refused the honour on the plea of ill-
health and ‘unprepared aptitude of mind[952].’ Eccleston mentions him as
the third who lectured at the Oxford Grey Friars as a master[953]. He was
afterwards sent to Cambridge and was the third regent master of the
Franciscans there[954].
4. Thomas of York (1253) is first mentioned in a letter of Adam Marsh
written at Lyons, 1245; the writer sends for various books, among which is
‘the chapter of the First Prophecy (Abbat Joachim?) which the beloved
brother in Christ, Thomas of York had[955].’
Soon afterwards we find him consulting with Adam, Grostete, and the Vicar
of the Provincial Minister, about sending English friars to Denmark[956]. He
wrote to Adam about the defeat of St. Louis and the Crusaders in 1250, and
Adam sent the letter on to Grostete[957]. About the same time Adam
remonstrates with him for breaking his promises, especially for omitting to
send him ‘the table of the Trinity’ (? tabula trinitatis)[958]. Another letter to
him from Adam Marsh refers to the anger of the King against Simon de
Montfort, whose friendship Thomas seems to have enjoyed and whose party
he no doubt supported. Perhaps it was before 1250 that Adam advised the
Provincial Minister to instruct Thomas,
‘that he should apply himself to the study of Holy Scriptures by attending
the lectures of the learned and investigating their writings,’
with a view to his eventually becoming lecturer to the Grey Friars at
Oxford; failing this, the writer hints that Thomas would probably be
summoned abroad[959]. In the same letter he refers to his ‘youthful age.’ At
the beginning of 1253[960] Thomas of York was presented to incept in
theology at Oxford, objections were raised on the ground that he had not
taken a degree in Arts. Eventually he was allowed to incept, but a statute
was passed to regulate the conduct of the University on similar occasions in

the future. The details of the controversy are given elsewhere[961]. The
vesperies took place on Thursday, March 13th, and the inception on the
following day, under the presidency of Friar Peter de Manners, apparently a
Dominican; Adam Marsh, who as master of the inceptor would naturally
have presided, left Oxford on March 12th. Thomas of York now became
lecturer to the Oxford Franciscans[962]. He was afterwards sent to
Cambridge and occurs as the sixth in the list of ‘Masters of the Friars
Minors’ there[963]. Adam Marsh writes to him in the most affectionate terms
and speaks highly of his learning, and the brightness of his intellect[964]; he
describes him to Grostete as an earnest, discreet, and benevolent man, filled
with a heavenly zeal for the salvation of souls[965]. According to the
Catalogus illustrium Franciscanorum he wrote a commentary on
Ecclesiastes[966].
Frater Thomas de Eboraco super Metaphysicam Aristotelis.
MS. Florence: Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. xiv, Sin. Cod. V.
5. Richard Rufus of Cornwall[967] was a Master, probably of Arts, when
he became a Minorite at Paris
‘at the time when Friar Elias threw the whole Order into confusion’ (c.
1238).
He came to England (where he made his profession) while the trial of the
Minister-General was yet pending in the Roman Court[968]. He is mentioned
as speaking at a chapter at Oxford soon after coming to England—probably
either the visitatorial chapter or the chapter held to protest against the
visitor’s conduct in 1238[969]. Soon after 1250 he received a command from
the General to go to Paris as lecturer, but he seems to have obtained leave to
continue his studies at Oxford owing to his weak health[970]. He probably
lectured on the sentences as B.D. about this time. But soon afterwards, ‘ob
vehementiores perturbationum occasiones[971],’ in Adam Marsh’s words, he
formed the ‘inexorable resolution’ of going to France in accordance with
the General’s permission: and Adam in the name of the other friars,
requested the Provincial to facilitate his departure by providing him with
suitable companions and the necessary manuscripts[972]. Early in 1253
again, Adam writes to the Provincial:

‘I beg you to look out for some one competent to act as secretary to Friar
Richard of Cornwall[973].’
It may then be inferred that he went to Paris in 1253, where, according to
Eccleston,
‘he gave cursory lectures on the sentences and was judged a great and
admirable philosopher[974].’
After lecturing in Paris, he returned to Oxford, it appears, and became
regent-master of the friars (c. 1255?)[975]. It was here that he developed the
‘errors,’ the verbal subtleties, which Roger Bacon so unsparingly
denounced. Writing in 1292, Bacon says[976]:
‘Et optime novi auctorem[977] pessimum et stultissimum istorum
errorum[978], qui vocatus est Ricardus Cornubiensis, famosissimus apud
stultam multitudinem, set apud sapientes fuit insanus et reprobatus Parisius
propter errores quos invenerat et promulgaverat, quum sollempniter legebat
sentencias ibidem, postquam[979] legerat[980] sentencias Oxonie, ab anno
Domini 1250o. Ab illo M CC L igitur tempore remansit multitudo in huius
magistri erroribus usque nunc, scilicet per quatraginta annos et amplius, et
maxime invalescit Oxonie sicut ibidem incepit hec demencia infinita.’
Adam Marsh, though in somewhat general terms, gives a far more flattering
account of Richard[981].
Martin de Sancta Cruce, Master of the Hospital of Sherbourne, bequeathed
to him in his will dated November, 1259, unum habitum integrum, and a
copy of the Canonical Epistles[982].
Assisi MS. 176 contains a compilation ascribed by a note in a late hand to
‘Master Richard Rufus of England;’ the volume was in the possession of the
friars at Assisi in 1373, consists of 226 leaves, and seems to contain more
than one treatise: it is not rubricated.
Inc. ‘Deus autem qui dives est in misericordia propter nimiam caritatem
suam.’
6. John Wallensis was B.D. of Oxford before he entered the Order[983]. He
must have become D.D. and regent master of the Franciscan schools at

Oxford before 1260[984]. It was probably after this that he went as lecturer
to Paris, where he was honoured with the title of Arbor Vitae[985], and
where he was buried[986]. But before his death he was again in England. In
October, 1282, ‘Friar John Wallensis, S.T.D.,’ was sent by Archbishop
Peckham as ambassador to the insurgent Welsh[987]. In 1283 he was one of
the five doctors at Paris who were deputed to examine the doctrines of Peter
John Olivi[988]. He enjoyed a great reputation as a theologian, and the
widespread and lasting popularity of his works is shown by the large
number of MSS. and printed editions which have come down to us. His
writings are specially illustrative of the practical side of the Franciscan
teaching.
Summa de Penitentia. Inc. ‘Quoniam provida solertia est.’
MSS. Brit. Museum: Royal 10 A ix. f. 1-50 b (sec. xiii); 4 D iv. fol. 244 b
(sec. xv)[989].
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine, 569, f. 86 b (sec. xiv).
Falaise:—Bibl. Publ. 38, p. 372 (sec. xiv).
Cf. Worcester Cathed. Libr. MS. 114 (= 789) ‘Jo. Wallensis ordinis
Praedicatorum summa de confessione[990].’
Breviloquium de quatuor virtutibus cardinalibus, or, de virtutibus
antiquorum principum et philosophorum: four or five parts:
i. De justitia; ii. De prudentia; iii. De temperantia; iv. De fortitudine; v. De
ordinatione virtutum (this is sometimes included in part iv). Inc. prol.
‘Quoniam misericordia et veritas.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 10 A ix., f. 67 b-99 (sec. xiii); 12 E xxi, § 2, (sec.
xv); Burney 360, f. 1 (sec. xv); Harleian 632, f. 25 (sec. xv).
Oxford:—Bodl.: Bodley 58 (= 2006); Laud, Miscell. 603, fol. 103 (sec.
xiv).—Corp. Chr. Coll. 18[991].—Oriel Coll. 34 (sec. xiv ineuntis)[992].
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3706 (sec. xiv), 6346 (xiv), 6776 f. 1-54 (xiv), imperf. at
the beginning.

Toulouse, 340. Cf. MS. St. Omer, 400 (sec. xiv). Breviloquium de sapientia
... sanctorum doctorum, etc.: inc. ‘Quoniam unica est Veritas’ (=
‘quoniam misericordia et veritas?’)
Printed at Venice, 1496; Lyons, 1511 (fol. 200 seq.); Argentina, 1518 (fol.
151 b-164); and sine anno et loco (Louvain 1485?) under the title
Liber de instructione principum per quatuor partes secundum quatuor
virtutes cardinales.
Ordinarium[993], or, Alphabetum vitae religiosae: 3 parts:
i. Diaetarium; ii. Locarium; iii. Itinerarium. Inc. prol. ‘Nunquid nosti
ordinem coeli.’ Inc. pars i. ‘Quoniam omni negotio.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Harl. 632, f. 1 (sec. xv).
Bodleian: Tanner 110, f. 124 (sec. xiv ineuntis); Laud, Miscell. 497 (sec.
xv).
Dublin:—Trinity Coll. 138 (= 278).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3588 (sec. xiv).
Charleville, 113 (xiv) and 272 (xiv).
Printed at Venice, 1496 (fol. 260); Lyons, 1511 (fol. 217-255); Argentina,
1518 (fol. 164).
Summa collectionum (or, collationum), or, Communiloquium, Summa
collationum ad omne genus hominum, or, De vitae regimine, or,
Margarita Doctorum, or, Communes loci ad omnium generum
argumenta. A compendium for the use of young preachers, consisting
of 7 parts:
i. De constitutione reipublice; ii. De colligatione membrorum reipublice; iii.
De informacione hominum; iv. De republica ecclesiastica; v. De
instructione scolasticorum; vi. De instructione religiosorum; vii. De
informacione hominum ut sint parati ad mortem. Inc. prol. ‘Cum doctor
sive predicator evangelicus.’ Inc. pars i. ‘Quoniam respublica, ut dictum
est, est universale quoddam corpus.’ Inc. cap. i. ‘Sed primo notandum est
quod respublica est res populi.’

MSS. Brit. Mus.: Harl. 632, f. 36 (xv).
Oxford:—Bodley 815 (= 2684), f. 108 (sec. xv).—Balliol Coll. 274 (a. d.
1409).—Lincoln Coll. 67 (sec. xiv).
Cambridge:—Peterhouse 12 or 2-3-9.—Pembroke 123. Cf. Public Library
Kk II, 11 (sec. xv). ‘Summa compilata a fratre Johanne Walense’—de
republica added in the table of contents.
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3488 (sec. xiv), 3935, f. 1 (sec. xv).
Evreux 11 (sec. xiv).
Basel, F. III. 16.
Printed at Cologne c. 1467 by U. Zell; Augsburg, 1475; Ulm, 1481; Venice,
1496 (f. 1-166); Lyons, 1511 (f. 1-139); Paris, 1516.
Floriloquium philosophorum, or, Floriloquium sive compendiloquium de
vita et dictis illustrium philosophorum, or, de philosophorum dictis
exemplis et vitis. 10 parts:
i. On philosophy in general; ii. On the name and profession of philosophers;
iii. On the succession of illustrious philosophers and their life; iv. On the
life and maxims of some less famous philosophers; v. Of divers philosophic
perfections; vi. On the four principal sects of philosophers—peripatetics,
stoics, academicians, and epicureans; vii. On the seven liberal arts; viii.
Poets and authors of apologues; ix. On the abuses of philosophy; x. On the
places where philosophic studies have been most honoured (e.g. Paris and
Oxford mentioned). Inc. prol. i. ‘Cum enim debeamus apes imitari.’ Inc.
prol. operis. ‘Cum ex vita gentilium.’ Inc. opus. ‘Circa primum notandum
quod diversimode describitur philosophia.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 6 B xi. f. 127 (sec. xiv).
Bodl.: Laud. Misc. 603 (xiv).
Cambridge:—Corp. Chr. Coll. 307 (xv).
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine 727, § 5.
Toulouse 340, vi. (xiv).—St. Omer 622 (a. d. 1346).

Printed at Venice, 1496 (f. 167-232); Lyons, 1511 (f. 140-194); Argentina,
1518 (f. 107-147).
Breviloquium de sapientia sanctorum. 8 chapters:
Inc. prol. ‘Cum varii sint homines omnes.... Licet in priori tractatulo[994].’
Inc. cap. i. ‘Sapientia enim dicitur ab eo quod est sapere.’
MSS. Bodl.: Laud. Misc. 603, f. 99 (sec. xiv).
Cambridge:—Corp. Chr. Coll. 307 (xv).
Toulouse 340, vi. (xiv).
St. Omer 622, § 3 (xiv).
Printed at Venice, 1496 (f. 233); Lyons, 1511 (f. 195-200 b); Argentina (f.
147 b-151 b), and sine anno et loco (Louvain 1485?).
Summa justitiae, or, Tractatus de septem vitiis ex [Gul. Alverno] Parisiensi.
10 parts.
i. De peccato in generali; ii. De superbia; iii. De invidia; iv. De ira; v. De
avaricia; vi. De accidia; vii. De gula; viii. De luxuria; ix. De quinque
sensibus corporis; x. De quibusdam peccatis, &c. Inc. prol. ‘Summa justicie
Christi fidelium est declinare a malo et facere bonum.’ Inc. opus. ‘Justicia
que est via ad regnum ut supradictum est in duobus consistit.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Harl. 632, f. 168.
Cambridge: Peterhouse 89 (= 1751).
Cf. MS. Oxford:—Exeter Coll. 7, § 4 (sec. xv). Jo. Wallensis Liber de vitiis
ex Parisiensi confectus: inc. ‘Peccatum vitandum est.’
Tractatus de vitiis et remediis eorum (doubtful).
Inc. ‘Dicendum est de vitiis seu peccatis primo in generali.’
MS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 4 D iv. f. 226-244 (sec. xv).[995]
Cf. Anonymous Summa de vitiis et virtutibus in MS. Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine
924 (sec. xiv), which is compiled chiefly from the Summa of William

Péraud.
Moniloquium vel collectiloquium. A work in 4 parts for the use of young
preachers:
i. De viciis; ii. De virtutibus oppositis dictis viciis; iii. De penis; iv. De
gloria beatorum.
The object is thus set forth in the prologue:
‘Cum almus Christi confessor beatus Franciscus, a summo magistro Ihu
Christo perfectissime edoctus et suo spiritu plenissime (?) inspiratus, in sua
sacra regula monuerit fratres suos, ut in suis predicacionibus sint eorum
eloquia casta et examinata ad edificacionem et utilitatem populi,
annunciando eis vicia et virtutes, penam et gloriam, cum brevitate sermonis:
ad occasionem dandam minoribus predicatoribus colliguntur dicta autentica
sanctorum de predictis 4 annunciandis.’
Inc. prol. ‘Cum almus,’ &c. Inc. opus. ‘Cum autem nostra sit intencio ut
dictum est aliqua auctentica in generali colligere.’ Inc. pars i., dist. i., cap. i.
‘De primo notandum quod describitur vicium sub nomine mali.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Harl. 632, f. 248.
Cambridge:—Peterhouse 87 or 2-0-4, ‘De quatuor predicabilibus ad omne
genus hominum.’—Pembroke Coll. 123.
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 6776, f. 55-352 (sec. xiv). Imperf. at the beginning; fol.
58, ’Cum autem sit intentio.’—‘Explicit summa de viciis et virtutibus
compilata a fratre Johanne Galensi ordinis fratrum minorum. Orate pro
eo.’
Falaise:—Bibl. Pub. 38, p. 468.
Munich:—Bibl. Reg. 23595 (sec. xiv), ‘Distinctiones predicabiles Johannis
Gallensis de virtutibus.’
Legiloquium sive liber de decem preceptis, or, De decem mandatis divinis,
or, Summa de preceptis.
Inc. ‘Scribam eis multiplices leges.... Omnipotens creator omnium.’

MSS. Brit. Mus.: Harl. 632, f. 307 b (sec. xv) imperfect.
Oxford:—Bodl. Rawlinson C. 534, f. 106 (sec. xiii): cf. Bodl. 2501, ‘forte
Jo. Wallensis.’—Lincoln Coll. 67, f. 143 (xiv).
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine 569, f. 139 b (xiv).
Bruges 239 (Haenel p. 756).—Falaise 38, p. 325 (xiv. ineuntis).—Toulouse
340 (xiv).
Extracts printed by Charma, ‘Notice sur un MS ... de Falaise,’ 1851.
Manipulus Florum, begun by John Wallensis, finished by Thomas
Hibernicus, to whom it is usually ascribed; excerpts from the fathers,
in alphabetical order.
Inc. prol. ‘Abite in agro, &c. Paupercula non habet messem.’ Inc. opus.
‘Abstinentia. Bonum est in cibo.’
MSS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 129 (sec. xiv).—Lincoln Coll. 98 (xiv).
Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 402 (a. d. 1306).
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine 1032, &c.
Troyes, 1785 (finitus a. d. 1306).—Basel, B iv. 9 (written a. d. 1324).
Printed at Piacenza 1483, Venice 1493, &c.
A similar work, ascribed in the same hand as the text to Friar John
Walensis, is contained in MS. Charleville 136 (sec. xiv); inc. ‘Accidia.
Nota accidiosus est.’
De origine progressu et fine Mahumeti et quadruplici reprobatione
prophetiae ejus, cap. xv.
Inc. ‘Ad ostendendum quod Mahumetes.’
Printed at Argentina 1550. The editor, G. Fabricius says: ‘hunc Galensis
libellum in dissipatis Bibliothecis inventum collegi.’ No MSS. of the
work have been discovered, and its authenticity seems very doubtful. It
is not mentioned by the earlier bibliographers, such as Philip de

Bergamo and Tritheim. Except in the number of chapters, it appears to
differ entirely from the Tract. contra falsitates legis Machometi of
Peter de Pennis: Quétif-Echard I 569; MS. Chapitre de Bayeux 42.
Sermones de tempore et de sanctis.
MSS. Bodl.: 1956 = . B. i. 14, now Bodley 50; referred to by Tanner.
Munich:—Bibl. Reg. 26941 (sec. xiv. ineuntis) contains a sermon preached
at Paris by John Wallensis.
Charleville 113 § 3 (sec. xiv and xiii), Sermones de tempore: inc. ‘Dominica
prima de adventu’: these are anonymous but follow some works by J.
Wallensis in the MS.
Postilla super Johannem.
MSS. Vienna:—Bibl. Palat. 1533 (sec. xiv).
Florence:—Laurentiana, ex bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. xxvii. Dext. Cod. iii.
‘Tabula super Postillam Fratris Joannis de Vallensis (sic) super
Joannem.’ The work itself is missing.
This appears to be identical with the Postilla in Evangelium Joannis,
printed among Bonaventura’s works. It is doubtful whether the
commentary should be ascribed to either of these writers. (See Hist.
Litt. xxv. 193-4.)
Collationes in Johannem. Ascribed also to Bonaventura, and printed among
his works (edit. 1589, tom. ii): probably by the same author as the
preceding Postilla.
Cf. MSS. Oxford:—Exeter Coll. 39 (xiv), Thomas Wallensis;—Bruges,
338, ‘Joannes Anglicus super Joannem’ (Haenel); or 474, ‘Scripta
Johannis Anglici super Johannitium’ (Laude).
Commentaries on Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua,
Judges, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Isaiah.
MSS. Oxford:—Bodl. Laud. Misc. 345 (sec. xiv), ascribed to John
Wallensis.—Merton Coll. 196 (sec. xiv), and New College 30 (sec.

xv), ascribed to Thomas Wallensis.—Leland mentions the same works
in the library of Christ Church, Canterbury, where they were ascribed
to John Wallensis (Leland Collect. III. 7).
The following works are sometimes assigned to John Wallensis:—
Expositio super Pater Noster.
MSS. Charleville 873 contains, according to Haenel (p. 120), ‘Joannis
Wallensis ... expositio super pater noster et dietarium super vita
religiosa.’ In the new catalogue this treatise is given as anonymous, the
same volume, No. 272 (sec. xiv), containing the Dietarium.
Mondée Abbey (diocese Lisieux), Cod. 3, Joannes Galesius Ordinis
Minorum super Pater noster (Montfaucon, p. 1333).
In fabulas Ovidii, or, Expositiones seu moralitates in lib. i. (?)
Metamorphoseon sive fabularum (Leland and Tanner). This appears to
be the work generally ascribed to Thomas Walleys, and, by M.
Hauréau, to Peter Bercherius[996]. There is no real ground for assigning
it, as Leland does, to John Wallensis.
MSS. Oxford: Bodl. Auct. F. 5. 16 (= Bodl. Sup. A. I Art. 86 or Bodl. 2581),
Johannes Anglicus.
Brit. Mus.: Royal 15 C xvi, anon.
Cambridge:—Peterhouse 12 or 2-3-9 ‘a fratre Thoma Waleys de provincia
Anglie ordinis Predicatorum.’
Dublin:—Trin. Coll. 8, anon., but bound up with works by John Wallensis.
Reims 741 (Haenel p. 405), ‘Liber fabularum a magistro Joanne Anglico
compositus.’
Troyes 1627 (sec. xiv), Thomas Waleys.
Printed at Paris 1511, &c.
In mythologicon Fulgentii.

A commentary on this by John Wallensis is mentioned by Leland in the
Library of the Friars Minors at Reading (Collect. III, 57). Many
anonymous treatises on the work are extant; e.g.
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 7 C I f. 311.—Dublin:—Trin. Coll. 8 (§ 8), bound
up with works of John Wallensis.
Cf. notice of John Redovallensis.
Comment. in Valerium de non ducenda uxore.
Seen by Leland in the Franciscan Library, London. The incipit which he
gives is merely that of the work itself, and is no assistance in
identifying the commentary of John Wallensis. The latter refers to the
epistle in his Breviloq. de quatuor virtutibus cardinalibus: MS. Brit.
Mus.: Royal 10 A ix, f. 83 b-84.
Cf. notice of John Redovallensis.
As to other works attributed to him with some show of reason by the older
bibliographers:
De cognitione verae vitae, mentioned by Wadding, is the same as the
Ordinarium. An anonymous treatise with this title is in Royal MS. 10
A ix. f. 109-133 (which contains some works by John Wallensis). Inc.
‘Sapientia Dei que os muti aperuit.’
De visitatione infirmorum: Augustine’s treatise on this is in the Royal MS.
above mentioned (fol. 134-145).
Declaratio regulae S. Francisci (printed at Venice, 1513 in Firmamentum
Trium Ordinum), is usually attributed to John Peckham.
Pastoralia by J. Wallensis; formerly in Harl. MS. 632, f. 261; (see old table
of Contents); fol. 250-265 (old pagination) are missing. Boston of
Bury calls this De cura pastorali: inc. ‘Licet beatus.’ Expl. ‘et haec ad
David.’
Collectio epistolarum decretalium Romanorum pontificum was by John
Gallensis of Volterra (c. 1200): printed at Ilerda 1576, &c.: MSS. Nat.
Libr. Paris 3925, A; Toulouse 368 (sec. xiii. med.).

Indices duorum operum; an alphabetical table of contents in Harl. MS. 632,
f. 133-167.
Summa confessorum; by John Lector of Freiburg: see MSS. Troyes, 156 and
1492 (sec. xiv), &c. Inc. ‘Quoniam dubiorum[997].’
De oculo morali; identical with the work attributed to Grostete and Peter de
Limoges. Inc. ‘Si diligenter.’ It may be noticed that Boston of Bury
attributes this to John Wallensis and does not mention it among
Grostete’s works (Tanner, Bibl. pp. xxxiii, xxxvii).
De correptione sive correctione. Inc.: ‘Probata virtus.’ Expl.
‘Commorabitur’ (Boston of Bury).
De exortatione. Inc. ‘Qui exortatur’: Expl. ‘Moderantis’ (ibid.).
De disciplina. Inc. ‘Disciplina ad mentem instruendam’ (ibid.)[998].
In quatuor libros Sententiarum. Inc. ‘Quoniam teste B. Augustino’ (Barth.
of Pisa, and Ph. of Bergamo).
De arte predicandi, ascribed to John Wallensis in MS. Paris: Bibl. Mazarine
569, f. 80 b: really by Thomas Walleys.
7. Thomas Docking, also called Thomas Good[999], was a native of Norfolk
and probably entered the Order at Norwich. In a letter written a. d. 1252-
3[1000], Adam Marsh asks the Provincial Minister to assign the bible of the
late P. of Worcester to ‘friar Thomas de Dokkyng,’ who was distinguished
by good morals and pleasant manners, a clear head, great learning and
ready eloquence; his friends were ready to pay handsomely for the book. He
was evidently a student at this time. He became D.D. and reader to the
Franciscans at Oxford about 1260[1001]. In 1269, when he took an active
part in the controversy with the Oxford Dominicans, he is described as
‘sometime reader at Oxford[1002].’ According to Blomefield, he was warden
of Norwich and died about 1270[1003]. His theological works, chiefly
biblical commentaries, were long held in high repute[1004]; some are still
preserved.
Expositio super librum Deuteronomii.
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 3 B xii (sec. xv).

Oxford:—Balliol Coll. 28 (a. d. 1442).
Lincoln:—Cathedral Libr. (Haenel p. 799), ‘Thomas Bockering.’
Comment. on Isaiah.
MS. Oxford:—Ball. Coll. 29 (sec. xv).
Expositio super Epistolas S. Pauli.
MSS. Oxford:—Ball. Coll. 30 (sec. xv), containing Galatians,
Ephesians[1005], Hebrews.
Magd. Coll. 154, Galatians, imperf. (sec. xv).
Lectura super Apocalypsin, doubtfully ascribed to him.
MS. Oxford:—Ball. Coll. 149 f. 107. Inc. ‘Panis ei datus. Querit propheta.’
Expositio Decalogi. Inc. ‘Non habebis deos alienos in conspectu meo. Hoc
est in corde.’
MS. Bodl. 2403 (= T. Bodley . F. 4. 9), now Bodley 453, f. 57-90[1006].
Questions on St. Luke.
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nationale, 3183, § 8 (sec. xiv).
Questio utrum Job in prosperis fuerit altior coram Deo quam in adversis.
MS. Ibid. § 11 (sec. xiv).
Comment. super Sententias, mentioned in the Catalogue of Illustrious
Franciscans (Leland)[1007].
8. H. de Brisingham[1008] is probably the same as
‘Frater Henricus Lector Oxoniensis Fratrum Minorum,’
who composed a Summa de Sacramentis in 1261[1009]. He afterwards
became thirteenth master of the Friars Minors at Cambridge[1010].
Blomefield claims him as a Norfolk man, and says that he died about
1280[1011]. He is perhaps to be identified with ‘Henricus de Oxonio

Chordigerae sectae’, whose sermons were seen by Bale in the Franciscan
Library at Reading[1012].
The De Sacramentis Summa is his only extant work.
MS. Bodl. Laud. Misc. 2, f. 130 (sec. xiv. ineuntis).
9. William of Heddele (Durham or Northumberland?) is mentioned by
Adam Marsh in a letter to the Provincial, c. 1253, as ‘your desirable son
Friar William de Hedele[1013].’ We know from another source that Heddele
was reader at Oxford in 1269, when he took part in the controversy with the
Friars Preachers[1014]. When Prince Edward went to the Holy Land,
‘he took with him,’ in the words of the so-called Lanercost Chronicle[1015],
‘the reader and master of the Friars Minors at Oxford, Friar William de
Hedley, a man beloved of God and in favour with men.’
The chronicler puts these events in the year 1266. Edward took the cross in
1268 and sailed in 1270. Friar William died on the outward voyage in the
sea of Greece:
‘his corpse,’ continues the same authority ‘being given to the waves as the
custom is, followed the course of the ships for three days, until, at Edward’s
command, it was taken again into the vessel and afterwards committed to
the earth.’
10. Thomas de Bungay (Suffolk) has been traditionally associated with
Roger Bacon and regarded as a wizard by later generations. Very little is
known of him. He perhaps entered the Order at Norwich. He lectured as
D.D. in the Franciscan convent at Oxford about 1270; he seems like Roger
to have attached a great importance to mathematics and may have held his
views on the value of natural science and of induction. He lectured
afterwards at Cambridge, being the fifteenth in the list of Franciscan
masters there. He was the eighth English Provincial Minister, and was
succeeded by Peckham, probably in 1275. He was buried at
Northampton[1016].
According to the Catalogue of Illustrious Franciscans he wrote a
Commentary on the Sentences[1017]. None of his works are printed; only
one seems to be extant in MS.

De celo et mundo: 3 books. Inc. ‘Summa cognicionis, &c. Aristoteles probat
his tres questiones in primo capitulo. Prima est quod omne corpus est
completum quo ad divisiones.’ Expl. ‘Hic terminantur questiones super
3 c. et m. a Magistro T. de bungeya.’
MS. Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 509, § 3 (sec. xiv. ineuntis).
Cf. MS. Bibl. Nat. Paris 16144 (sec. xiii), ‘Thomas super librum de celo et
mundo’ (Aquinas?).
11. John Peckham was born in Sussex and received his earliest education
in the Priory of Lewes[1018]. He took the Franciscan vows about 1250[1019];
he was then tutor to the nephew of Master H. of Anjou, perhaps in the
University of Paris, but was probably for the time being residing at
Oxford[1020]. On entering the Order he resigned the tutorship. Adam Marsh
calls him ‘Dominus Johannes de Pescham Scholaris;’ he may therefore
either have had no degree at this time, or that of bachelor. He appears to
have spent some time at Oxford, as in later years he expresses his gratitude
for the training he received in the Franciscan convent of that
University[1021]. He then returned to France, studied under Bonaventura,
and took the Doctor’s degree at Paris, where he ruled in theology[1022].
Among his pupils was St. Thomas of Cantilupe, Bishop of Hereford[1023].
At Paris too he came in contact with Thomas Aquinas and probably
attended his lectures. He was present when the latter submitted his doctrine
about the ‘Unity of form’ to the judgment of the masters in theology;
‘we alone,’ the Archbishop wrote afterwards, ‘stood by him, defending him
to the best of our power, saving the truth[1024].’
He was at Paris during the troublous times which followed William of St.
Amour’s attack on the Mendicants, and wrote a defence of the latter[1025].
He returned to England probably about 1270 or soon after, and was
admitted at Oxford to the same degree as he held at Paris[1026]. He now
became lecturer to the Franciscans. On May 2, 1275, he was with Friar
Oliver de Encourt Prior of the Dominicans, appointed, by the King’s writ, to
decide a suit in the University which had long been under consideration in
the Chancellor’s court[1027]. It was probably soon after this that he was
elected ninth Provincial Minister and confirmed by Bonaventura[1028]. He
did not hold this office long, being in 1277, summoned by the Pope

(Nicholas III?) to lecture on theology in the schools of the Papal Court at
Rome[1029]. After lecturing here for something less than two years, he was
appointed Archbishop of Canterbury by Papal bull in January 1279, and
consecrated by the Pope in the following March[1030]. His official
connexion with the Order did not cease; he was deputed by the Pope
‘protector of the privileges of the Order of Minors in England,’
and frequently used his powers for the benefit of the Franciscans[1031]. His
relations to the Oxford Franciscans, as well as his condemnation of
erroneous doctrines at the University, have already been noticed. While
enforcing to the uttermost his legal rights, the Archbishop evinced a special
solicitude for the poor, feeding them in time of famine, remonstrating with
covetous abbats and careless landlords[1032]. He himself is said to have
travelled on foot, to have surpassed all in watchings and fastings and prayer,
to have used none but vile garments and bedding—in fine to have lived as
became one who held perfection to consist in the contempt of riches and the
search for truth[1033]. He died on December 8, 1292, and was buried ‘among
the monks’ of Canterbury near Becket’s tomb[1034]. His heart was buried in
the choir behind the High Altar at the Grey Friars of London[1035]. He
named as his executors the Friars Minors of Paris[1036]. The Dominican
Nicholas Trivet sums up his character in these words[1037]:
‘He was a zealous promoter of the interests of his Order, an excellent maker
of songs, of pompous manner and speech, but of kind and thoroughly
liberal heart.’
A careful and valuable account of his works will be found in Mr. Trice
Martin’s preface to Peckham’s Register, Vol. III[1038].
A few additions may be made to Mr. Martin’s list of his extant writings.
Constitutiones Ottoboni cum expositione Peccham.
MS. Cambridge:—Pembroke Coll. 145 (= 2073). Cf. Wilkins, Concilia, II,
50-51.
Quaestiones ordinariae. Inc. ‘Utrum theologia ex duobus.’

MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3183 (sec. xiv); containing the questions, Utrum
theologia sit prae ceteris Scientiis necessaria Praelatis Ecclesiae, and,
Utrum theologia ex duobus componi debuerit Testamentis. Cf. MSS.
ibid. 15805, Quodlibeta S. Thome, J. de Pechan, Guil. de Hozon; and
15986, f. 238 (sec. xiii), Responsio ad questionem Joh. de Peschant.
Tractatus Fratris Joannis Pecham Ord. Min. contra Fratrem Rogerium
(Ord. Praed.) obloquentem contra suum Ordinem (called by Tanner,
Contra Priorem Cisterciensium). Inc. ‘Super tribus et super quatuor
sceleribus.’
MS. Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. XXXVI. Dext. Cod.
xii. p. 25 (sec. xiv. exeuntis).
Formula confessionum. Inc. ‘Sicut dicit b. Joannes.’
MS. Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. IV. Sinist. Cod. xi (a.
d. 1433).

Scriptum super Ethicam.
MS. Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. XII. Sinist. Cod. xi.
12. Henry de Apeltre was the twelfth reader at Oxford, and seventeenth
master of the Friars Minors at Cambridge. Nothing more is known about
him[1039].
13. Robert Cross or Crouche[1040] (de Cruce) must have lectured at
Oxford about 1280. In April of that year Peckham forbade an Oxford
Dominican to visit a certain ‘college of women’ on account of grave
suspicion, on the accusation of Friar Robert de Cruce[1041]. Leland states
that he was immersed in philosophical studies to an advanced age, and
when at last he betook himself to theology he showed greater skill in
investigating speculative subtleties than in exploring the literal sense; the
statement might be made with equal truth of most of the scholastics. He
became Provincial Minister soon after 1280. The successor of John
Peckham, Hugh of Bath, died within a short time of his appointment, and
was succeeded by Robert Cross as eleventh minister[1042]. He held the
office in June 1284, when he obtained for the English Minorites exemption
from the payment of a custom due to the King from all who passed to or

from the Continent by the port of Dover[1043]. In Sept. of the same year he
held a chapter of the English Franciscans[1044]; and in March 1285, he
represented the English Province at the General Chapter of Milan[1045]. He
may have resigned the dignity at this Chapter; on Oct. 31, 1285, Peckham
addresses a letter to ‘W., Provincial Minister of the Friars Minors’; this
must be William of Gainsborough[1046]. Robert Cross was buried at
Bridgwater[1047]. None of his works remain. Leland mentions his
commentaries on the Physics and the Sentences, on the authority of the
Catalogue of Illustrious Franciscans.
14. R. de Toftis, called by Wood, Radulphus de Toftis.
15. Alanus de Rodano.
16. Roger de Marston or Merscheton[1048] was D.D. of Oxford and
lecturer to the Franciscans before 1290. Some questions on which he
disputed, perhaps before he became doctor, are preserved in a MS. at
Assisi[1049]. He subsequently lectured at Cambridge as twelfth master of the
friars[1050]. According to Ehrle, Marston’s theological and philosophical
teaching bears strong resemblance in some respects to that of Peter John
Olivi[1051]. He became thirteenth Provincial Minister perhaps at the great
Chapter of Paris in 1292, certainly between 1285 (when W. of
Gainsborough was appointed) and 1299 (when Hugh of Hertepol was
Provincial). He is said to have been warden of Norwich and to have died in
1303[1052]. He was buried at Norwich[1053].
17. Alan de Wakerfeld[1054] was at Oxford in 1269, when he represented
his convent on several occasions in the controversy with the Friars
Preachers[1055]. He was not yet lector.
18. Nicholas de Ocham occurs in the Assisi MS. as Hotham, Master
Nicolaus de Hotham, and Frater N. de Ocham minor[1056]. He lectured at
Oxford towards the end of the thirteenth century. Except the quaestiones
disputatae at Assisi, it is doubtful whether any of his works are extant[1057].
Leland says:
Catalogus eruditorum Franciscanorum Nicholai Ochami meminit; cujus et
depraedicat libros; Commentarios, videlicet, in Sententias Petri

Longobardi, et opus, cui De Verbo titulus. Scripsit libellum De latitudine
oppositionum, ingeniosi iudicium astrologi[1058].
Cf. MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14565 f. 173 b (sec. xiv). ‘Fratris Nicholai
minoris replicationes;’ and Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 319, ‘Nicholai
super 2 et 3 sententiarum, in 3 libris.’
Another Friar Nicholas Minorite, (called by Sbaralea[1059], ‘Specialis’),
flourished about the same time as, or soon after, N. of Ocham, and wrote a
chronicle on the Franciscan contest with the Pope, a. d. 1321-1328 (MS.
Bibl. Nat. Paris, 5154: Extracts in Böhmer’s Fontes Rer. German. IV, 588
seq.)
19. Walter de Knolle was afterwards twenty-third master at
Cambridge[1060].
20. Hugh de Hertepol or Hartlepool was a friar and a man of importance
in Oxford in 1282, when Devorguila appointed him to be one of the two
proctors to whom the government of the new college of Balliol was
entrusted; the statutes of 1282 are addressed to ‘Friar Hugh de Hertilpoll
and Master William de Menyl[1061].’ It was probably some years later that
Hugh became S.T.P. and lecturer to the Franciscan convent. His disputations
seem to have been considered valuable and several of them are
preserved[1062]. He disputed
‘in the vesperies before the inception of Friar John de Persole (i.e. Persora,
his successor) at Oxford[1063].’
He became fourteenth Provincial Minister, in succession to Roger Marston.
The date of his appointment or election is uncertain. In April 1299[1064], we
hear of him going as Provincial, with Friar W. of Gainsborough as his
socius, to the General Chapter at Lyons; on this occasion the King gave to
the two friars 10 marks. In 1300 (Aug. 7) at Dorchester (Oxon), he chose
twenty-two friars of the Oxford convent and presented them to Dalderby,
Bishop of Lincoln[1065], with the request that he would license them to hear
confessions. The bishop asked ‘whether he was presenting them for all the
convents in the diocese of Lincoln,’ and, finding that it was only for the
Oxford convent, refused to license more than four. At length a compromise
was effected, and eight of the friars were licensed to hear confessions in the

archdeaconry of Oxford. In 1301[1066], Hugh was again abroad, probably at
the General Chapter at Genoa. In Sept. 1302, he was, with W. of
Gainsborough and others, sent as ambassador to the Court of Rome to
negotiate for peace with the King of France[1067]. While in Italy on this
mission, he attended the General Chapter at Assisi[1068]; he probably did not
return to England, as we are told that he was ‘buried among the friars at
Assisi[1069].’
21. John de Persora or Pershore (c. 1390) called in the Assisi MS. John de
Persole (see above, under Hertepol).
22. John of Berwick lectured at Oxford before the end of the thirteenth
century. He was buried at Stamford. Bale identifies him with a Brenlanlius
who is referred to by John Pico de Mirandola in his treatise contra
Astrologos.
Joannis Anglici Ordinis Minorum Summa Astrologiae Judicialis, quae
anglicana vulgo nuncupatur (doubtful).
MS. Florence:—Laurentiana, in Plut. XXIX (Montfaucon, p. 237, 299).
Printed at Venice 1489, under the name of Joannes Eschvid (i.e. Eshendon
or Ashendon; see MS. Bodl. 3467, p. 91).
Questiones Joannis de Beroyko de Ordine Fratrum Minorum de Formis.
MS. Venice:—Bibl. S. Anton. (Tomasin, p. 9).
Leland adds: ‘Collaudat eruditorum Index Franciscanorum ejus In
longobardum elucubrationes[1070].’
23. Thomas of Barneby, wrongly called by Brewer ‘Johannes de Barneby,’
is identified by Wood, without much probability, with the first Senior Dean
of Merton College, who was appointed by Kilwardby in 1276[1071]. He is
mentioned in a record dated March 20, 1326, as ‘master of the Friars
Minors[1072].’
24. Adam of Lincoln, D.D. and regent master of the Franciscans at Oxford,
succeeded Hugh of Hertepol as fifteenth Provincial Minister, probably in
1304[1073]; he had ceased to hold the office in 1310[1074]. He was one of the
doctors of theology appointed in the Provincial Council of York in July

1311, to examine the charges of heresy against the Knights Templars[1075].
He was buried at Lincoln. The Register of the Friars Minors of London
adds: qui fecit mirabilia; probably some word like opera is to be
supplied[1076].
25. William of Gainsborough[1077] must have been Provincial Minister
before he lectured at Oxford[1078]. He was Provincial in Oct. 1285, being
the twelfth in order[1079]. He was doctor of theology in 1294, when he was
sent with Friar Hugh of Manchester, a Dominican, to the King of France, to
protest against the latter’s seizure of Gascony and to renounce homage in
the name of the English King[1080]. In 1299 he accompanied the Provincial,
Hugh of Hertepol, to the General Chapter at Lyons[1081]. Early in 1300 he
was called by Boniface VIII to lecture on theology in the Roman
Curia[1082]; the King paid his expenses.

Fratri Willmo de Geynesburgh de ordine Minorum eunti ad curiam
Romanam ad mandatum Pape ad legendum de Theologia in palatio ejusdem
Pape, de dono Regis ad quatuor equos sibi emendos pro equitatura sua et
socii sui et pro hernes’ eorundem portand’ versus eandem curiam, 50 marc’.
Eidem de dono Regis ad expensas suas morando in eadem curia pro negotio
predicto 50 marc’, per manus Domini J. de Droken’ liberantis eidem denar’
apud London’ mense Maii. Eidem de dono Regis nomine expensarum
suarum eundo de Wysebech usque London’ pro dictis denariis ibidem
recipiendis mense predicto 26s. 8d. Summa 68 li[1083].
During the two years that he remained at Rome[1084], his energies were not
entirely confined to his work as lecturer. Boniface was at this time
endeavouring to bring the war between France and England to a close by
arbitration. In Sept. 1300, Friar William of Gainsborough was appointed by
Edward I to act as one of his ‘proctors and special messengers’ at Rome in
this matter[1085]; and in Sept. 1302, he was employed with Hugh of
Hertepol and others in the same capacity[1086]. On Oct. 24, 1302, the Pope,
passing over the candidate of the Chapter, nominated William, Bishop of
Worcester; the consecration took place on Nov. 25, the enthronement on
June 9, 1303[1087]. As a protest against the Papal interference, the King
imposed a fine of 1000 marks on the new bishop[1088], but granted him
£100 for the expenses for his inthronization in consideration of his great
need[1089]. William still continued to be employed in affairs of state[1090]. In
March 1307, at Carlisle, he demanded and obtained from the Papal nuncio
the excommunication of the murderers of John Comyn[1091]. On March 22,
he was appointed to accompany Prince Edward on his journey to France to
claim the hand of Isabella[1092]. Later in the same year he was sent on an
embassy to Rome in connexion with the same affair[1093]. On his return
journey[1094] he died at Beauvais (Sept. 17); as nearly all his attendants died
at the same time, it was believed that the calamity was due to poison[1095].
The bishop was buried among the Friars Minors at Beauvais[1096].
26. John Basset.
One of this name is said to have written Chronica in English; he
was probably much later than this friar. Tanner, Bibl. 79.

27. Thomas Rondel or Rundel[1097] was lecturer at Oxford in the last years
of the thirteenth century, having previously read the sentences at Paris[1098].
In 1309 he was one of the commissioners or inquisitors appointed to hear
the accusations against the Knights Templars; he is then described as master
of theology, and probably resided in the convent at London[1099], where he
was buried[1100].
28. Adam of Howden or Hoveden or Houdene[1101] was D.D. and
probably regent master of the Franciscans at Oxford in 1300. He was one of
the twenty-two friars presented by Hugh of Hertepol on July 26 of this year,
to receive the bishop’s license to hear confessions at Oxford, and was one
of the eight actually licensed[1102]. He afterwards read at Cambridge as the
twenty-ninth master of the Friars Minors[1103]. An ‘Adam de Houdene’ was
chamberlain to W. of Gainsborough, Bishop of Worcester (1302-7), but he
was not a friar.[1104]
A sermon of his preached on the feast of Epiphany is in MS. Oxford, New
Coll. 92, f. 82 b[1105].
29. Philip of Briddilton or Bridlington was contemporary with Adam of
Hoveden, and like him was licensed as D.D. by the Bishop of Lincoln to
hear confessions in 1300[1106]. He responded in the schools to Master
Richard de Heddrington or Herington on the question ‘an omnes beati
equaliter participant beatitudine[1107],’ a problem which agitated western
Christendom in the early fourteenth century.
30. Peter de Baldeswell[1108] was at Oxford in 1300, when he was
presented by the Provincial to the Bishop of Lincoln, but not licensed to
hear confessions[1109]. He was not then D.D.
31. John de Horley, co. Oxon or Surrey (the same applies to him as to P. of
Baldeswell).
32. Martin of Alnwick was a member of the Oxford convent in 1300; he
was among the twenty-two friars for whom Hugh of Hertepol sought to
obtain license to hear confessions, and was one of those rejected. He was
not a D.D. at this time[1110]. He took his degree and lectured at Oxford
between 1300 and 1311. In the latter year he was summoned to Avignon to
take part in the controversy between the Conventual and Spiritual

Franciscans, as one of the four advisers of the General Minister. The matter
was tried by a commission of cardinals and theologians; Martin and his
fellows pleaded the cause of the Conventuals, or Community of the Order.
The case was adjourned to the Council of Vienne and decided by the bull
Exivi de Paradiso (which was published in the last session of the Council,
May 6, 1313) in favour of the better section of the Conventuals[1111]. Martin
of Alnwick was evidently one of the leading Franciscans of the time.
According to Bale he died 1336 and was buried at Newcastle[1112].
A universal chronicle, ‘Flores temporum seu chronicon universale ab urbe
condita ad annum 1349,’ is sometimes attributed to him; Leland, e.g.
says: ‘Catalogus quoque Franciscanorum scriptorum Chronicorum
Alaunovicani meminit’ (Tanner, Bibl. 515). See also MS. Arundel 371
(sec. xv). This is the chronicle of Hermann Gigas based on the well-
known chronicle of Martinus Polonus (printed 1750). In the preface
Hermann says that he has followed, ‘inter modernos, Martinum
Romane sedis penitenciarium (?) de ordine fratrum predicatorum’ (Ar.
MS. 371, f. 2).
Several philosophical treatises by Martinus Anglicus are extant in MS.
Vienna:—Bibl. Palat. 4698 (sec. xiv).
33. Robert of Beverley.
34. Richard de Coniton or Conyngton (co. Cambridge or Huntingdon)
was at Oxford in 1300 and was one of the friars to whom the Bishop of
Lincoln refused the right to hear confessions[1113]. He became D.D. and
lecturer to the Franciscans between 1300 and 1310. He was afterwards
thirty-first master of the Minorites at Cambridge[1114]. He was sixteenth
Provincial of England, and held the office in 1310[1115]. About this time the
Order was disturbed by the violent antagonism of the two parties within it
—the ‘Community,’ the lax or moderate party which comprised the
majority and included the official heads of the Order, and the strict or
‘Spiritual’ party. A papal investigation into the causes of dispute and into
the observance of Rule by the Order was instituted, and the leaders of each
party summoned to the Curia. Richard Conyngton as Provincial was the
official representative of the English Franciscans at Avignon and Vienne
(1301-1313)[1116]. He was buried at Cambridge[1117].

He is said by Leland and Bale to have written a treatise De Christi Dominio
against Ockham in defence of the papal authority[1118].
Wadding states that he had seen Richard’s Commentary on the Sentences in
the Vatican[1119]. Bale mentions his exposition on the seven penitential
psalms, ex monasterio Nordovicensi[1120].
Tractatus Magistri Richardi Conygton Ministri Angliae de paupertate
contra opiniones Fratris Petri Joannis (Olivi). Inc. ‘Beatus qui
intelligit super egenum et pauperem. Ps. Praecedit actus meritorius.’
MS. Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. XXXVI, Dext. Cod.
xii (sec. xiv exeuntis).
35. Thomas of Pontefract was at Oxford in 1300; when the bishop of
Lincoln refused to grant him license to hear confessions. He became D.D.
and lecturer in theology some years after this. In July 1311 he was one of
the inquisitors appointed to extort confession of heresy from twenty-four
Templars in the Province of York[1121].
36. Peter de Sutton; ‘jacet Stanfordiae,’ i.e. Stamford, co. Lincoln[1122].
37. Ralph of Lockysley[1123] or Lockeleye[1124] was regent master at
Oxford about 1310. He was buried at Worcester[1125]. According to Bale (I,
366) he wrote De paupertate evangelica, &c.
38. William of Schyrbourne (1312) was at Oxford in 1300; he was one of
the friars presented by the Provincial for license to hear confessions, and
rejected by the bishop of Lincoln[1126]. He was master of the Friars Minors
in 1312, and in this capacity gave some support to the Dominicans in their
controversy with the University[1127].
Leland says: ‘Ejus extant Quodlibeta Theologica, lib. i.’ (?)[1128].
39. William of Nottingham is confounded with the fourth Provincial
Minister by Wadding, Bale, Pits, and the Register of Friars Minors of
London[1129]. In a work attributed to him, but really composed by his
namesake, occurs the following note, in a hand of the fifteenth century[1130]
—

‘This Notyngham was secular canon and precentor of the Church of York’
(and in another hand), ‘afterwards he became a friar of the order of St.
Francis.’
In the absence of any confirmatory evidence, no weight can be attached to
this statement. No William of Nottingham occurs in Le Neve’s Fasti. At the
beginning of the fifteenth century a John of Nottingham held two prebends
and was treasurer of York: and he may be the person referred to in the first
part of the note; it is worthy of remark that the MS. originally came from
York. William of Nottingham must have been reader to the Franciscans
soon after 1312. While regent in theology at Oxford he was largely
occupied in transcribing MSS., especially the works of Nicholas de
Gorham, the expenses being defrayed by his brother Dominus Hugh of
Nottingham[1131]. He succeeded Richard Conyngton as seventeenth
Provincial Minister[1132]. In 1322 he was at the General Chapter of Perugia,
and, with the other ministers, signed the famous letter in which the
Franciscans declared that the doctrine De paupertate Christi was not
heretical but sane and catholic; this was the beginning of the revolt of the
whole Order (as distinguished from the Spirituals) against John XXII[1133].
According to Bale he died Oct. 5, 1336[1134]. He was buried at
Leicester[1135].
Bale ascribes to him Determinatio pro lege Christianorum, lib. i. Inc.
‘Numquid deus posset revelare aliquam legem.’
‘Ex Redingensi Minoritarum cenobio.’ (MS. Seld. sup. 64, f. 215.)
40. John de Wylton lectured at Oxford in 1314: in February of that year he
appears, as representative of the Minorites, in a list of twelve regent masters
in theology (i.e. the theological faculty for the time being), who condemned
as heretical eight articles, chiefly concerning the nature of the Trinity, in the
convent of the Austin Friars[1136]. Wood[1137], Bale[1138], and Tanner[1139],
call him an Austin Friar. Bale states that he studied and lectured as master at
Paris, and says that John Baconthorpe, in his commentaries on Books I and
II of the Sentences, speaks of him with high praise[1140]. His works seem to
have perished[1141].
41. John de Crombe (Cott. MS.) or Crombre (Phil. MS.) was perhaps a
native of Combs in Suffolk: he was buried at Oxford[1142].

Compendium theologicae veritatis per fratrem Johannem de Combis, lib.
vii. Inc. ‘Veritatis theologie cum superni.’
MS. Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 193.
Anonymous in MSS. Charleville 19 (written a. d. 1337), and Metz 448 (sec.
xv): generally ascribed to Albertus Magnus and printed at the end of
tom. xiii. of his works, Lyons 1651.
42. William of Alnwick is possibly identical with the friar called Roger of
Alnwick in the list of Oxford Franciscans presented to the bishop of
Lincoln in 1300[1143]. After lecturing at Oxford (c. 1315-1320?), he was
sent to the University of Naples, as Doctor of Theology[1144]. He was
present at the General Chapter of Perugia in 1322, and joined with the other
leading men in the Order in declaring that the doctrine of Evangelical
Poverty was not heretical[1145]. In 1330 he was made bishop of Giuvenazzo
near Bari[1146]. He is said to have died at Avignon in 1332[1147].
Bartholomew of Pisa mentions him among the famous Franciscan
theologians of the English nation[1148]; William Woodford places him
among
‘inceptores ordinis Minorum qui egregie scripserunt super sententias[1149].’
Questiones Almoich super primum Sententiarum.
Questiones Almoich in 1 et 2 Sententiarum[1150].
MSS. Padua:—Bibl. S. Anton. (Tomasin, p. 61 b, 62 b.)
Cf. MS. Ball. Coll. 208 (sec. xiv), an abridgment of the commentary of
Duns Scotus on the 2nd book of the Sentences by ‘Master William of
Alnwick, Friar Minor.’
43. William Herberd or Herbert, if we may credit the Lanercost
Chronicle, which is usually trustworthy at this period, was at Paris in
1290[1151]. From his place in the list of masters, it might be inferred that he
lectured at Oxford about 1315-1320. But if the following works ascribed to
him are genuine, he must have flourished not much later than 1250-60.
They are preserved in a fourteenth-century MS. formerly in the library of

Henry Farmer of Tusmor, Oxon, now in the Phillipps Library at Thirlestaine
House[1152].
Sermo Fratris Willielmi Herebert in Ecclesia B. Mariae Virginis Oxon; in
haec verba: ‘Dixit mater Ihu ad eum, Vinum non habent.’
Sermo ejusdem Fratris in Ecclesia B. Mariae Oxon. in translatione S.
Edmundi Archiepiscopi in haec verba: ‘Homo quidam erat dives et
induebatur purpura,’ etc.
(St. Edmund was translated in 1247; the words however must mean in festo
translationis, i.e. June 9th.)
Ejusdem Fratris Epistolae summo Pontifici, Episcopo Coventrensi et
Lichfeldensi (Roger of Wesham?), Symoni de Montfort, etc.[1153]
Historica quaedam de Papis Romanis (anon.).
Tractatus de Veneno et Antidotis (anon.).
Hymns in old English[1154], quibus haec notula adjicitur: ‘Istos Hympnos et
Antiphonas transtulit in Anglicum non semper de verbo in verbum, sed
frequenter sensum aut non multum declinando, et in manu sua scripsit frater
Willielmus Herebert; qui usum horum autem habuerit, oret pro anima dicti
Patris.’
William Herbert was buried at Hereford, which was probably his native
convent[1155].
44. Thomas of St. Dunstan (Kent?).
45. John of Reading (de Radingia) was buried at Avignon. He had
probably gone to the papal curia in connexion with the revolt of Michael de
Cesena and William of Ockham[1156].
Cf. MS. Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. XXXV, Dext.
Cod. xi, Primus Fratris Joannis de Padingia (= Radingia?), S.T.D.
ord. Min. (super sententias?).
46. John of Thornton; the name is uncertain; it may be Jornton; the
Phillipps MS. reads Zortone.

47. Richard of Drayton, was buried at Shrewsbury[1157].
48. Robert of Leicester seems to have been a protégé of Richard Swinfeld,
bishop of Hereford, to whom he dedicated his first extant work in
1294[1158]. He was S.T.P. and in residence at Oxford in 1325, and probably
lecturer to the friars about the same time. In this year he was associated
with Nicholas de Tyngewick, M.D. and S.T.B. as ‘Magister Extraneus’ of
Balliol College[1159]. The two were called upon to decide whether the
statutes of the College allowed the members to attend lectures in any
faculty except that of Arts, and ordained ‘in the presence of the whole
community’ that this was not permissible. Among those present in the Hall
of Balliol when the decision was proclaimed was Richard Fitzralph,
afterwards Archbishop of Armagh, the great opponent of the Mendicant
Orders[1160]. Bale and Pits say that Robert died at Lichfield in 1348; ‘but,’
adds Wood, ‘I suppose ’twas sooner.’
De compoto Hebreorum aptato ad Kalendarium, four parts with prologue;
composed a. d. 1294. Inc. prol. ‘Operis injuncti novitatem, pater
meritis insignissime, magister et domine R. Dei gratia Herfordensis
antistes ecclesie.’
Compotus Hebreorum purus. Inc. ‘Prima earum est a creacione mundi.’
Commentariolus supra tabulas in tractatu primo supra recensito descriptas
(or, De ratione temporum), written in 1295. Inc. ‘Ad planiorem et
pleniorem prescripti tractatus intelligenciam.’
These three works are contained in MS. Bodl. Digby 212 (sec.
xiv).
Distinctiones.
MS. Cambridge:—Pembroke Coll. 220, § 1; ‘Enchiridion poenitentiale ...
ex distinctionibus ... Rob. de Leycester (aliorumque).’
De paupertate Christi.
Attributed to him by Leland[1161].
49. Walter de Foxisley, or Ffoxle in Phillipps MS. (Norfolk or Wilts?).

50. Henry Cruche. A sermon by ‘H. de Cruce, Minor,’ is in Merton Coll.
MS. No. 248, f. 170. This name is omitted in the list given in the Phillipps
MS.
51. John de Ratforde (cf. 63rd master).
See MS. Bodl. Digby 216, f. 40, containing three theological questions to
which the name ‘Ratforde’ is prefixed; the MS. dates from the
fourteenth century: the questions are: ‘an quilibet adultus teneatur
laudare Deum; utrum ex sui meriti vel demeriti circumstantiis juste
debeat augeri vel minui pena; utrum ad omnem actum creature
rationalis concurrat necessario Dei efficientia specialis.’
52. John de Preston[1162].
53. Walter de Chauton[1163] is no doubt identical with Walter de Chatton,
who with the warden was summoned to appear in the Mayor’s Court, to
answer a charge, brought against the convent, of wrongfully keeping two
books, in 1330[1164]; he evidently held some official position at this time,
presumably that of regent master. He is said to have been warden of
Norwich, probably his native convent, and to have taught theology
there[1165]. He was one of the D.D.’s whom Benedict XII consulted in
drawing up his Statutes for the Franciscan Order in 1336[1166]. This fact
lends some support to Bale’s statement that he became papal penitentiary
and died at Avignon in 1343[1167]. Bartholomew of Pisa mentions him
among the famous writers of the Order; William of Woodford among those
who entered the Order in their youth, and ‘wrote many works of great
wisdom[1168].’
Cathon sur les Sentences [W. Chatton[1169] or R. Cowton?].
MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 15886, 15887 (sec. xiv), two copies.
Questio fratris Galtheri magistri ... de schaton, que est secunda in ordine
primi sui in prologo. Inc. ‘Utrum Deus possit creare.’ Expl. ‘Et ideo
non est simile.’
MS. Cambridge:—Public Library, Ff. III, 26, f. 122, 123, 130 b.

Cf. MS. Harl. 3243, fol. 55, Adam Wodham de divisione, etc. contra
Chatton.
54. John de Ridevaus, Rideval, or Redovallensis, sometimes called John
de Musca, according to Bale[1170], flourished about 1330. Of the works
attributed to him, the Commentary on Fulgentius seems to be the same as
that attributed to John Wallensis; similarly perhaps with the commentary on
the letter of Valerius to Rufinus; the moral exposition of the Metamorphoses
seems to differ from that ascribed to Thomas Walleys and Peter Bercherius.
Lectura super Apocalypsi.
MS. Venice:—St. Mark, Class. I, Cod. 139, fol. 110-119 (sec. xiv),
‘Extracta de lectura fratris Joannis Rydelbast super Apocalypsi, ordinis
Minorum.’
‘Commentarius super Fulgencium continens picturas virtutum et viciorum
sub ymaginibus deorum et dearum quos colebat vana superstitio
paganorum editus a fratre J. de Ridevall de ordine fratrum minorum.’
Inc. ‘Intencio venerabilis viri Fulgencii.’
MSS. Cambridge:—Pub. Libr. Ii II, 20, f. 121-162 (sec. xv); and Mm I, 18,
§ 6 (xv).
Worcester Cathed. Libr. 154 (= Bernard 829).
Venice:—St. Mark, Class. I, Cod. 139, f. 121-136 (xiv).
‘Ovidii Metamorphoseos fabule ccxviii moraliter exposite.’ Inc. ‘In hujus
expositionis initio.’
MSS. Cambridge:—Pub. Libr. Ii II, 20, f. 162-199 (anon. but in the same
writing as the Comment. super Fulgencium which it follows).
Worc. Cath. Libr. 89 (= 764), ‘Jo. Risdevallus.’
In Valerium ad Rufinum de uxore non ducenda. Inc. ‘Loqui perhibeor.’
Cf. MSS. Cambridge:—Pub. Libr. Mm I, 18, § 5; and London:—Lambeth
Palace 330 (xv).

Commentaries on St. Augustine’s De Civitate Dei. Inc. ‘Magnus dominus et
laudabilis nimis in civitate Dei.’
MSS. Oxford:—C.C.C. 186 and 187 (sec. xv ineuntis); on books 1, 2, 3, 6,
and 7, by ‘Jo. Rydevallis’ or ‘Rydewall,’ Friar Minor[1171].
55. Lawrence Briton is perhaps the same as Laurentius Wallensis
mentioned by Tanner, who wrote a dialogue on free will[1172]. A sermon by
him is preserved in Merton College, MS. 248, f. 170. He flourished about
1340. A Dominican of the same name was S.T.P. of Paris in the thirteenth
century[1173]. Among the MSS. mentioned in the old catalogue (1381) at
Assisi[1174], is a ‘Summa mag. fratris Laurentii Vualensis Anglici ordinis
Minorum;’ this is perhaps a mistake for Johannes Wallensis.
56. John de Rudinton or Rodyngton belonged to the custody of Oxford,
and the convent of Stamford[1175]. He was D.D. of Oxford[1176], nineteenth
Provincial Minister of England[1177], and is described in the Register of the
Grey Friars of London as ‘vir sanctissimus[1178].’ He was buried at
Bedford[1179]; Bale and his followers mention 1348, the date of the first
great pestilence, as the year of his death.
Joannes Rodinchon in lib. i. Sententiarum.
Included by Joannes Picardus in his Thesaurus Theologorum (a. d. 1503)
[1180].

Johannis de Rodynton determinationes theologicae.
MS. Munich:—Bibl. Regiae, Cod. Lat. 22023 (sec. xiv).
Quaestiones super quartum librum Sententiarum (by the same author?).
MS. ibid. fol. 18.
Questiones super quodlibeta rodincon.
MS. Bruges, 503 (sec. xv).
57. John de Howden (c. 1340).
[John Hoveden of London, S.T.P. and author of many works, was not a
friar; he died a. d. 1275: Tanner, Bibl. 415.]

58. T. Stanschaw, called by Brewer, G. Stanforth[1181], by others, Thomas
Stanchaw, Straveshaw, &c., was a Minorite of Bristol[1182]. Bale says:
‘obiit Avenione a. d. 1346. Ex quodam Minoritarum registro[1183].’
Some sermons in MS. Merton Coll. 248 (sec. xiv exeuntis) are ascribed to
‘Stanschawe.’
A number of works are attributed to him by Bale, ‘ex Bibliotheca
Nordovicensi,’ and ‘ex officina Roberti Stoughton[1184].’
59. Edmund Grafton.
60. Stephen Sorel.
61. Adam Wodham or Godham was one of the most famous of the later
Franciscan schoolmen[1185]. He is said to have lived chiefly at Norwich,
London, and Oxford[1186], and was probably reader in theology at several
convents in succession. He was a follower of William of Ockham in
philosophy and probably attended his lectures. He may be the Adam to
whom Ockham’s Summa logices was addressed[1187]. The date of his
lecturing as regent master at Oxford is unknown; it must have been about
1340 or soon after. He was perhaps the ‘Frater Adam magister in sacra
theologia de Anglia,’ who went to Basel in 1339 to consult Friar James de
Porta on some miracles alleged to have been wrought there[1188]. He died, if
we may believe Bale, at Babwell in 1358[1189].
Comment. in IV libros Sententiarum, abbreviated by Henry of Oyta. Inc.
prol. ‘Ista est lex Adam.’
MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 15892 and 15893 (sec. xiv)[1190].
Bruges, 162, ‘Magistri Adae lecturae super IV. Sententiarum’ (?).
Toulouse, 246, the abbreviated version of the lectures of Adam Godham or
‘Adam de Vodronio’ by Henry de Hoyta, written in the Franciscan
convent at Paris, a. d. 1399.
Rouen, 581 (sec. xiv-xv).

Printed at Paris, 1512. Perhaps some of the MSS. cited above contain the
original work of Adam Wodham. See Wadding, Sup. ad Script. 2-3.
Quaestiones variae philosophicae et theologicae, by Godham and
others[1191].
MS. Brit. Mus.: Harl. 3243 (sec. xiv).
Comment, super Cantica Canticorum.
MS. formerly in the Franciscan Library in London (Leland, Collect. III, 49).
Postilla super Ecclesiasticum, Lib. I.
‘Ex registro Decani Nordovicensis’ (Bale MS. Bodl. Seld. sup. 64).
Determinationes, or, Determinationes XI. Inc. ‘Utrum officina.’
Mentioned in Catalogus illustrium Franciscanorum, and by Bale (MS. ut
supra) ‘ex bibliotheca Nordovicensi[1192].’
62. Robert de Redclive.
63. Thomas Radford (cf. 51st master).
64. John Went or Gwent was a native of the Bristol custody[1193]. He
probably incepted in theology and lectured to the Friars at Oxford about
1340 or soon after. His character for holiness was such that he was believed
to have wrought miracles in his lifetime[1194]. He succeeded John de
Rodyngton as Provincial Minister, being the twentieth in Order, probably
between 1340 and 1350[1195]. Bale adds:
‘he died at Hereford a. d. 1348, as I have found in a register of the
Minorites[1196].’
It is however not improbable that he found only the first statement in the
register and added the date. Both the catalogues of the Provincial Ministers
state that he was buried at Hereford[1197].
65. Thomas Oterborne can hardly have written the chronicle generally
ascribed to him. The chronicle itself bears no marks of having been written
by a Franciscan; even the notices of the Order given in Walsingham and the

Eulogium Historiarum are sometimes omitted, and usually shortened, in the
so-called Otterbourne. But apart from this, the evidence of dates is fairly
conclusive: the chronicle, as edited by Hearne, leaves off abruptly in the
year 1420, and Hearne puts Otterbourne’s death at 1421. Pits and Wood
suppose from MSS. which end in 1411 that the writer died in that year.
Hearne says
‘there are not wanting MSS. which bring the history hardly beyond Edward
III.’
But even assuming the existence of such MSS. it is practically impossible
that they can have been the work of the Franciscan doctor. Thomas
Oterborne must have lectured at Oxford before 1350. It is true that the last
nine names of lectors given in the list are in a more recent hand than the
earlier ones; but the names of Went and Oterborne are in the same writing,
and there can be no reasonable doubt that they were contemporaries. The
dates of Oterborne’s two immediate successors at Oxford are
unknown[1198], and the list of lectors here comes to an end. We cannot
therefore know whether there were any more lectors before Simon
Tunstede. Assuming that he was the sixty-eighth lector, we may naturally
conclude that the sixty-fifth read several years before him, i.e. several years
before 1351 when Simon was ‘regent among the Minorites at Oxford[1199].’
It is therefore most probable that Thomas was reader not later than 1345.
The historian was perhaps the Thomas Otterburn who became rector of
Chingford in 1393 and was ordained priest in 1394[1200].
66. John Valeys[1201] was perhaps the Friar John Wells who took a
prominent part in the disputed election to the Chancellorship in 1349, as a
supporter of John Wyllyot, fellow of Merton, whose conduct seems to have
been of a peculiarly riotous and lawless character[1202]. He may possibly be
the John Welle, S.T.P. and Friar Minor[1203], who was robbed by his servant
in London in 1377; some curious details about this affair will be found in
Appendix B.
67. Richard Malevile of the London Custody (c. 1350?); this name is
added in a still later hand.

CHAPTER III.

FRANCISCANS WHO STUDIED IN THE
CONVENT AT OXFORD, OR HAD SOME OTHER
CONNEXION WITH THE TOWN OR THE
UNIVERSITY.
Agnellus or Angnellus of Pisa was custodian of Paris before becoming first
Provincial of England[1204]. He is said to have been made Provincial by St.
Francis in 1219[1205]; the order as given by Francis a S. Clara[1206] is as
follows:
‘Ego frater Franciscus de Assisio Minister Generalis praecipio tibi fratri
Agnello de Pisa per obedientiam, ut vadas ad Angliam, et ibi facias officium
Ministeratus. Vale. Frater Franciscus de Assisio.’
It may be doubted whether this letter is authentic, nor is the date beyond
dispute. It may be considered as certain that Agnellus did not come to
England till September 1224[1207]. He was then a deacon, and about thirty
years of age[1208]. He landed with eight others at Dover, went to Canterbury,
and thence to London, establishing houses and receiving novices. Such was
his humility that he long refused the order of priesthood, and only at length
consented, when the Provincial Chapter had procured a command from the
General Chapter, that the order should be conferred on him[1209]. He was a
zealous guardian of the primitive poverty of the Rule of St. Francis, and
would only allow houses to be built or areas to be enlarged where it was
absolutely necessary[1210]. He urged the demolition of a conventual building
called Valvert at Paris, and forbade the enlargement of the house at
Gloucester: he had the infirmary at Oxford built so low that a man could
scarcely stand upright in it. He built a school at Oxford of more generous
proportions, and encouraged the love of learning in the Order[1211]. The
choice of Grostete as the first master of the Minorites was due to
Agnellus[1212]. He was, according to Matthew Paris, on familiar terms with

the King, and was one of his counsellors[1213]. In December, 1233, he
offered his services as peace-maker between Henry III and the rebellious
Earl Marshall, though his efforts to induce the latter to submit were
unavailing[1214]. It would seem to have been after this that he went to Rome
on some business of the English prelates[1215], and he may also at the same
time have attended a General Chapter in Italy[1216]. On his return, he was
seized with dysentery at Oxford; it was believed that his health had never
recovered from the severities to which he was exposed while labouring for
peace in the winter of 1233[1217]. He recommended that the General
Minister, Elias, should be requested to appoint Albert of Pisa, or Haymo, or
Radulf of Rheims, as his successor. He constituted Peter of Tewkesbury his
Vicar, and made his last confession to him. He died at Oxford in great pain,
crying continually, ‘Veni, dulcissime Jesu.’ The exact date of his death is
uncertain; it was probably early in 1235[1218]. He was, says Eccleston,
‘a man specially endowed with natural prudence and foresight, and
conspicuous for every virtue[1219].’
He was buried in a wooden or leaden coffin in the choir of the chapel before
the altar. When this chapel was superseded by the larger church, the friars
came by night to remove the body; they found the coffin and the grave
‘full of the purest oil, the corpse with its garments incorrupt and smelling
most sweetly.’
His bones were laid with due pomp in ‘a fair stone sepulchre’ in the new
church, and the miracles which were wrought at his tomb were a source of
honour and profit to the Convent at Oxford[1220].
Richard de Ingewrthe or Indewurde (Norfolk) is named second in the list
of friars who came over with Agnellus in 1224. He was a priest and
advanced in years; according to Eccleston he was the first Minorite who
preached to the people ‘citra montes.’ With three other friars he established
the first house of Franciscans in London (at Cornhill); he then proceeded to
Oxford with Richard of Devon, hired a house of Robert le Mercer in St.
Ebbe’s, and thus founded the original convent in the University town. The
two companions then went on to Northampton, where they again hired a
house and founded a friary. Richard of Ingewrthe afterwards became
custodian of Cambridge, which was specially noted for its poverty under his

rule. In 1230, when Agnellus attended the General Chapter at Assisi, he was
associated in the Vicariate of the English Province with Henry de Ceruise or
Treviso, a lay-brother from Lombardy. Soon after this he was sent by the
General, John Parens, as Provincial Minister to Ireland. At length he was
released from the office in General Chapter by Albert of Pisa (c. 1239), set
out as a missionary to Palestine, and died there[1221].
Richard of Devon, a young acolyte, was the third of those who came over
with Agnellus. He accompanied R. of Ingewrthe from Canterbury to
London, Oxford, and Northampton;
‘and (in Eccleston’s words) left us many examples of longsuffering and
obedience. For after he had traversed many provinces in obedience to
commands, he was for fifteen years worn out by frequent quartan fevers and
remained continually at Romehale[1222].’
Adam of Oxford was a master before he entered the Order[1223]. The
account of his conversion given by Eccleston[1224] is as follows:
Master Adam of Oxford, of worldwide fame[1225], had made a vow that he
would do anything he was asked to do ‘for the love of the blessed Mary;’
and he told this to a certain recluse, who was a friend of his. She revealed
his secret to her friends, that is, to a monk of Reading, another of the
Cistercian Order, and a Friar Preacher; telling them that they could gain
such a man in such a way; not wishing that Adam should become a Friar
Minor. But the Blessed Virgin did not permit anyone in his presence to
make the needful request; but deferred it to another time. One night he
dreamed that he had to cross a bridge, where some men were throwing their
nets into the stream, endeavouring to catch him: but he escaped this with
great difficulty and reached a very peaceful spot. Now when by the divine
will he had escaped all others, he went casually to see the Friars Minors,
and during the conversation Friar William de Colvile, the elder, a man of
great sanctity, said to him: ‘Dear master, enter our Order for the love of the
Mother of God and help our simplicity.’ And Adam immediately consented
to do so, as if he had heard the words from the lips of the Mother of God.
He assumed the habit on January 25[1226], probably a. d. 1227. He was at
this time assistant, or secretary[1227], to the great Adam Marsh, whom he
soon afterwards induced to join the Franciscans. Shortly after this, Adam of

Oxford went to Gregory IX, and was at his own desire sent to preach to the
Saracens[1228]. From a letter of Grostete’s, addressed to Agnellus and the
Convent of Friars Minors at Oxford, relating to this subject, and written in
or before 1231[1229], we learn that Adam had formed the resolution of going
to preach to the infidels before he entered the Order, and that he was
induced to take this latter step partly because it was likely to add to his
influence as a missionary. Grostete urges the Friars not to grieve for his
loss:
‘for the light of his knowledge is so bright that it ought to be concentrated
most there where it may dissipate the thickest darkness of infidelity.’ ‘Have
no fear,’ the writer continues, ‘that he will be cut off from the “Sacred
Page;” he has humility, and no “haeretica pravitas” will slip in.’
He died at Barlete, and miracles are said to have been wrought by his relics
or his memory[1230].
William of York, ‘a solemn bachelor,’ was probably an Oxford man, as he
entered the Order on the same day as Adam of Oxford[1231].
Adam Rufus[1232] studied under Grostete in the early part of the thirteenth
century, presumably at Oxford. A letter from ‘Robert Grostete called
Master,’ written perhaps before he held any preferments, i.e. before 1210,
addressed to ‘Master Adam Rufus,’ is extant; it is a treatise on the nature of
angels, and Grostete asks Adam to inquire diligently the opinions of the
wise men, with whom he converses, on the subject. In another letter written
about 1237, Grostete mentions having heard of Friar Ernulphus, papal
penitentiary, from ‘Friar Adam Rufus of good memory,’ formerly his
beloved pupil and friend. It may be inferred from his connexion with
Grostete and Ernulphus or Arnulfus, Vicar of the Order of Minorites[1233],
that the Order which he entered was that of the Franciscans.
Henry de Reresby, who entered the Order abroad, was vicar of the
custodian of Oxford about 1235 or before. He was made first provincial of
Scotland by Elias, but died before he could enter on his duties[1234].
According to Leland’s notes from Eccleston he died at Leicester; according
to another account, at Acre in Norfolk[1235]. After his death he appeared to
the custodian of Oxford, and said that,

‘if the friars were not damned for excess in buildings, they would at any
rate be severely punished,’ and added, ‘if the friars said the divine service
well, they would be the sheep of the Apostles[1236].’
Walter, a canon of Dunstable, and John, a novice of the same priory,
escaped from their house through a broken window and joined the
Franciscans at Oxford in 1233. Walter afterwards returned with three
Minorites to the Chapter of Dunstable, seeking absolution. After submitting
to corporal punishment, he was absolved; he was further ordered to restore
the books and clothes (quaternos et pannos) which he had taken with him,
and to deliberate for a year—i.e. during his noviciate—whether the
discipline of the Order which he had entered was more severe than that of
the Order he had left; if it were so, he was to remain a Minorite; if not, he
was to return to Dunstable. John was found by the Prior of Dunstable at
London and similarly absolved: he afterwards went to Rome[1237].
John of Reading, who became Abbat of Osney in 1229[1238], joined the
Minorites in 1235, probably at Northampton[1239]. He is probably the Abbat
to whom Bartholomew of Pisa refers as having assisted with his own hands
at the building of the Franciscan Church at Oxford[1240]. He was certainly at
Oxford about 1250, when Adam Marsh wrote to the Provincial that he was
in ill-health and requested that Friar Adam de Bechesoueres, the physician
of the Order, might be sent to Oxford to attend him[1241]. Another ‘Frater
Johannes Anglicus de Redingis’ was Visitor of Germany in 1229, and
Minister of Saxony 1230-1232[1242].
Albert of Pisa did not, as stated by Bartholomew of Pisa and others,
accompany Agnellus to England. He was (according to Eccleston) Minister
of Hungary, Germany (1223-1227), Bologna, the March of Ancona, the
March of Treviso, Tuscany, perhaps of Spain in 1227[1243]. He was one of
the three recommended by Agnellus as fit persons to succeed him as
Provincial of England, but he was not appointed by Elias till almost a year
after the death of the first Minister[1244] (c. 1236). He reached England on
December 13, and celebrated a Provincial Chapter at Oxford on February
2[1245]. On another occasion Eccleston tells us—
‘Friar Albert was present at the sermon of a young friar at Oxford; and
when the preacher boldly condemned loftiness of buildings and abundance

of food, he rebuked him for vainglory[1246].’
Soon after his arrival, Albert appointed lecturers at London and
Canterbury[1247], though he does not appear to have been a learned man
himself. His connexion with Oxford was slight, and his acts as Provincial
can hardly claim a place here. After remaining two years and a half in
England, he went to Rome to take part in the proceedings against
Elias[1248]. On the deposition of the latter (May 15, 1239), Albert was
elected Minister General. He died in the same or the following year[1249]
and was buried at Rome[1250].
Ralph of Maidstone, bishop of Hereford 1234-1239, resigned his see in
December, 1239, and was admitted into the Franciscan Order by
Haymo[1251]. He took this step in accordance with a vow, made perhaps
before he became bishop[1252]. It is uncertain at which convent he took the
habit. Bartholomew of Pisa states that he helped with his own hands to
build the church at Oxford[1253]. It is not improbable that he was there for
some time. He was a Master of Paris, noted for his learning, and was among
the ‘famous Englishmen’ who left Paris owing to the disputes in 1229 and
settled at Oxford on the invitation of Henry III[1254]. According to a later
addition in one of the MSS. of Eccleston’s Chronicle, he lived five years
after assuming the habit, staying for the most part in the convent of
Gloucester[1255]. The Dunstable Annals state that he was, for a time at any
rate, rendered incapable by a fall from a rock, but whether this took place
before or after he became a friar is not quite clear[1256]. He died at
Gloucester (c. 1245) and
‘was buried in the choir of the brethren, in the presbytery, on the north side
under an arch[1257].’
A most interesting relic of the friar-bishop is now in the British Museum.
Royal MS. 3 C. xi, a copy of the New Testament with gloss (sec. xiii),
belonged to the Friars Minors of Canterbury,
‘ex dono Fratris Radulphi de Maydenestane, quondam Episcopi
Herefordensis.’
He wrote a Commentary on the Sentences when he was Archdeacon of
Chester (c. a. d. 1220). This is mentioned in a treatise on the Sacraments,

‘secundum Mag. R. de Maidinstan archidiaconum Cestrensem super
Sententias.’
MS. London: Gray’s Inn, 14, f. 28-32 (sec. xiii).
William of Nottingham was marked out by nature for a Mendicant Friar.
‘He told me,’ writes Eccleston, ‘that when he was living in his father’s
house and some poor boys came begging alms, he gave them of his bread,
and received the crust from them, because it seemed to him, that hard bread,
which was asked for the love of God, was sweeter than the delicate bread
which he ate and his companions; and so, to make their bread sweet like
this, the little boys went and begged in their turn (ab invicem) for the love
of God[1258].’
William’s brother, Augustine, was also a Minorite; he was first in the
household of Innocent IV, accompanied the Patriarch of Antioch, the pope’s
nephew, to Syria, and at length became bishop of Laodicea[1259]. William
himself successfully championed the interests of his Order against the
Dominicans at the Roman Curia[1260]. At one period he lived for some time
in the Franciscan convent at Rome, where, though (to quote his own words)
‘the brethren had no pittance except chestnuts, he grew so fat that he often
blushed[1261].’
He acted as vicar for Friar Haymo in England (1239), and in 1240 was
himself
‘elected and confirmed Provincial Minister by those to whom the
appointment had been entrusted[1262].’
He had never held any subordinate office, such as that of custodian or
warden[1263]. He was a diligent student of the Scriptures, and seems to have
attended Grostete’s lectures at Oxford[1264]. As minister, he was energetic in
furthering the study of theology, and in developing the educational
organization of the Franciscans in England[1265]. During his ministry, the
friary at Oxford was greatly enlarged[1266]. Evidence of his popularity was
given in the Chapter held at Oxford by the General Minister, John of Parma
(c. 1248), when the friars unanimously refused to sanction his
deposition[1267]. He was ‘absolved’ from the ministry in the General

Chapter of Metz, and sent on behalf of the Order to the Pope[1268]. It was
probably in this Chapter, that, with the assistance of John Kethene and
Gregory de Bosellis, he carried a decree ‘almost against the whole Chapter,’
‘ut privilegium indultum a Domino Papa de recipienda pecunia per
procuratores penitus destrueretur; et expositio Regulae secundum dominum
Innocentium, quantum ad ea in quibus laxior esset quam Gregoriana,
suspenderetur[1269].’
The cause of his deposition is unknown, but the event excited the
displeasure of the English friars, who called a Provincial Chapter and
unanimously re-elected him[1270]. A letter from Adam Marsh, congratulating
him on this second election and urging him not to decline the office is
extant[1271]. But William of Nottingham was already dead. When he reached
Genoa on his mission to the Pope, his socius, Friar Richard, was struck
down by the plague;
‘while others fled, he remained to comfort his companion, and like him he
was struck down and died[1272].’
The date of the Chapter of Metz, and consequently of William’s death, is
not quite certain; it was probably in the spring or early summer of
1251[1273]. A few extracts from the chronicle of Eccleston (who knew him
personally) will illustrate the character of the man.
He sat very long in meditation after matins, and was unwilling to attend to
confessions and consultations at night, as his predecessors had done....
Above all things, he was careful to avoid the vice of suspicion. Familiarities
of great persons and of women he most studiously avoided, and, with
wonderful magnanimity, thought nothing of incurring the anger of the
powerful for the sake of justice. He used to say that great persons entrap
those familiar with them by their advice, and women with their mendacity
and malice turn the heads even of the devout by their flatteries. He studied
with all diligence to restore the good name of those who were defamed,
provided that he thought them penitent, and to comfort the hearts of the
desolate, especially of those who held offices in the Order[1274].
He represented the tendency to a less strict interpretation of the Rule in
regard to money than had hitherto obtained in England, holding that—

‘the friars might in a hundred cases lawfully contract debts, and might with
their own hands dispense the money of others in alms. He said further that it
was right after a visitation to amuse oneself a little in order to distract the
mind from what one had heard[1275].’
The following story may be regarded as an instance of his cynicism or
knowledge of human nature:—
‘He used to narrate that St. Stephen, the founder of the Order of Grammont,
placed a chest in a secret and safe place, and forbade anyone to go near it
during his life. The brethren were very inquisitive, and after his death could
not refrain from breaking it open, and they found only a piece of parchment
with the words; Brother Stephen salutes his brethren and prays them to
guard themselves from the laity. For just as you held the chest in honour, as
long as you did not know what was in it, so they will hold you in
honour[1276].’
That the well-known Commentary on the Gospels, called also Unum ex
quatuor, or De concordia evangelistarum, by Friar William of Nottingham,
was by this William, and not by his namesake, the seventeenth provincial of
the English Minorites[1277], is proved by Eccleston’s words (Mon. Franc. I,
p. 70)—
‘... Verba Sancti Evangelii devotissime recolebat; unde et super unum ex
quatuor Clementinis (Phillipps MS. f. 80 reads Clementis) canones perutiles
compilavit, et expositionem quam idem Clemens fecit complete scribi in
ordine procuravit.’
The commentary was founded on the work of Clement of Langthon[1278],
and the number of MSS. of it still in existence attest its popularity in the
Middle Ages.
The work comprised 12 parts. Inc. ‘Da mihi intellectum.’
MSS. Brit. Museum: Royal 4 E ii. (a. d. 1381); readers are asked to pray
‘pro anima Fratris Willielmi de Notingham, qui studio laborioso
predictam Expositionem ex variis compilavit.’
Oxford:—Bodl.: Laud. Misc. 165 (sec. xiv ineuntis), Balliol Coll. 33 (sec.
xiv exeuntis). Merton Coll. 156 and 157 (sec. xiv). Magdalen Coll. 160

(sec. xv). St. John’s Coll. 2 (sec. xv).
Cf. Merton Coll. 68, fol. 121 (sec. xv), ‘Questiones quas movet Notyngham
in scripto suo super evangelia extracte secundum ordinem
alphabeticum per Mag. Joh. Wykham.’ Inc. ‘Abel. Queritur super:’
Lincoln Coll. 78 (sec. xv), a similar work: Inc. ‘Abraham. Queritur
super illo dicto.’
Comment. in Longobardum, perhaps by the other W. of Nottingham.
Mentioned in the Catalogue of Illustrious Franciscans (Leland, Script.).
A. of Hereford (c. 1248) was assigned by the Provincial to Adam Marsh as
his secretary. Adam thought him too able a man to be kept in this
subordinate position; his learning and eloquence marked him out for a
teacher and preacher; many of those appointed by the Provincial Chapter to
lecture on theology were far inferior to him. In addition to this his health
would not stand the constant strain to which the secretary of the
indefatigable doctor was necessarily subjected. Adam therefore requested
the Provincial to send him to London to pursue his studies, as A. of
Hereford himself desired[1279].
Laurence de Sutthon was the friar whom Adam Marsh suggested to the
Provincial as A. of Hereford’s successor. A ‘Friar Laurence’ was with Adam
in 1249, and the latter wrote to Thomas of York, probably after 1250:
‘Friar Laurence sends you the books of the mother of philosophy (?) for
which you sent[1280].’
Hugo de Lyndun seems to have been a weak brother at Oxford—weak in
mind and body—whom Adam Marsh took under his especial care (c. 1253)
[1281].

John of Beverley was a friar at Oxford when Martin was warden, and was
known to Adam Marsh. Friar Thomas of York laboured for the salvation of
the father of this J. of Beverley[1282].
Gregory de Bosellis was the first lecturer to the friars at Leicester[1283] (c.
1240?). He was at the General Chapter of Genoa (1244) or Metz when he
supported W. of Nottingham, Minister of England[1284]; and he was Vicar of

the Province at the time of the same Minister’s death[1285]. He was with the
Earl and Countess of Leicester in Gascony[1286], and went to the papal court
with the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1250[1287], when the rules of the
Order against riding on horseback were relaxed in his favour[1288]. He had
studied at some University, probably at Oxford, and was capable of filling
Adam Marsh’s place as lecturer to the friars there, though it does not appear
whether he ever actually did so[1289].
Thomas of Maydenstan, an invalid novice at Oxford, c. 1253; Adam
Marsh hearing a rumour that he was to be sent away from Oxford begged
the Minister to let him remain,
‘as it is believed that his removal would do injury to the souls of several
persons of whose conversion no slight hope is entertained.’
The brethren at Oxford joined in the request[1290].
Thomas Bachun of the Convent of Nottingham was recommended by
Adam Marsh as a suitable person to act as private secretary or amanuensis
to Friar Richard of Cornwall, when the latter was about to proceed to Paris,
1252. It is however uncertain whether he was appointed or whether he
studied at Oxford[1291].
Adam de Bechesoueres or Hekeshovre[1292] occurs several times in Adam
Marsh’s letters as the chief physician among the early English friars. Thus
at one time Adam writes to John of Stamford, custodian of Oxford,
requesting him to allow a poor sick scholar named Ralph of Multon, a
friend of the writer’s, to consult Friar A. de Bechesoueres, who has already
done him good. The famous Walter de Merton went to him once with a
letter of introduction from Adam Marsh. He was wanted again at Oxford to
attend Friar John of Reading, formerly Abbat of Osney. Adam Marsh
recommended Grostete to consult him about his health. At another time we
hear of him going to the General Minister in France, with a ‘supplicatory
letter’ from Adam Marsh;
‘he promised,’ adds the latter in a letter to the English Provincial, ‘to return
to England soon and humbly submit in all things to the regular discipline.’
N. of Anivers, Anilyeres or Aynelers, a youth of ability, fair learning and
great promise, was ordered by the Minister General to go to France,

probably about the year 1248. Adam Marsh, anxious that the best should be
done both for the young friar and the Order, after consultation with Peter of
Tewkesbury, custodian of Oxford, obtained leave from the Provincials of
England and France for him to stay for a year or two in England, the
consent of the General being also secured:
‘it is thought,’ adds Adam in his letter to the Minister of France, ‘that he
will at present find the requisite helps to the successful study of letters more
easily obtainable in England than anywhere else.’
N. de Anivers was therefore allowed to spend a year in theological study at
Oxford, Cambridge or London. Adam Marsh maintained his interest in his
welfare, and, after the year was over, requested the Minister of France to
allow him to continue his studies in England up to the ensuing Pentecost: it
is probable that he was a pupil of Adam’s at Oxford[1293].
William of Pokelington (Yorkshire) entered the Order about 1250 and
made his profession at Oxford in 1251[1294]. He was then a master. Shortly
before this he had been ill and perhaps took the vows on his recovery[1295].
He was an intimate friend of Adam Marsh and at one period acted as his
secretary[1296]. Adam employed him several times as messenger to
Grostete[1297], who had a high opinion of him and liked to have him as a
companion[1298].
Walter de Madele, Maddele or Maddeley studied in the Franciscan
Convent at Oxford (c. 1235 seq.). While here, he ventured to disregard the
custom which forbade the friars to wear shoes.
‘It happened,’ says Eccleston[1299], ‘that he found two shoes, and when he
went to Matins, he put them on. He stood therefore at Matins, feeling
unusually self-satisfied. But afterwards when he was in bed, he dreamt that
he had to go through a dangerous pass between Oxford and Gloucester
called “boysaliz” (?), which was infested by robbers; and when he was
descending into a deep valley, they rushed at him from both sides, shouting,
“Kill him!” In great terror he said that he was a Friar Minor. “You lie,” they
cried, “for you do not go barefoot;” and when he put out his foot
confidently, he found that he was wearing those same shoes: and starting in
confusion from sleep, he threw the shoes into the middle of the courtyard.’

Walter was ‘socius’ or secretary to Agnellus and was at Oxford at the time
of the latter’s death (1235)[1300]. Later he was in Germany with Peter of
Tewkesbury, minister of Cologne, and returned to England in 1249 with
Friar Paulinus, perhaps a German, in obedience to Peter[1301]. He enjoyed a
considerable reputation as a theologian and was lecturer at a Franciscan
Convent. Adam Marsh once sent for him to come and see him at Oxford.
‘I conferred with him as you desired,’ he writes to the Provincial[1302],
‘about investigating the meaning of Holy Scripture in the original books of
the saints, and he professed himself very ready to do this or anything else
which you thought fit to enjoin on him.’
This was not the only subject discussed at the interview. The English
Minister suspected Walter of a desire to go abroad and of having obtained
from the General the promise of a lectureship in some foreign convent or
University. The Provincial had indeed just received an order from the
General to send some English friars to teach at Paris, and perhaps Madele’s
name was mentioned. Madele however denied the imputation, and Adam
recommended the Provincial to keep him in England, sending other friars to
Paris, and to remedy his grievances. Though he had long taught theology
with success, no competent provision had been made for him; he had not
only to exhaust his mind by studies but also to wear out his body by writing
daily with his own hand, as he lacked the ‘great volumes and the assistance
of companions,’ which had been provided for his predecessors in the office.
Eccleston refers to him as dead when he wrote his chronicle[1303]. None of
Madele’s writings[1304] have been preserved.
G. of St. Edmund: Adam Marsh wrote to the Provincial (W. of
Nottingham) on behalf of Martin the warden and the other friars at Oxford,
requesting him to order without delay
‘that Friar G. de Sancto Eadmundo be restored to the convent of friars at
Oxford[1305].’
Thomas of Eccleston, the earliest historian of the Franciscan Order in
England, was probably a native of Lancashire[1306]. All that is known of
him is contained in his Chronicle. He was an inmate of the London Convent
when William of Nottingham was minister (1240-1250), and speaks from
his own experience of the poverty and hard fare of the brethren there[1307].

He was a student at Oxford in the lifetime of Grostete, whether before or
after the latter became bishop is not clear[1308]. He knew the earliest
converts to the Order in England, and enjoyed the intimacy of William of
Nottingham[1309]. His history is dedicated to Friar Simon of Esseby—
perhaps Ashby in Norfolk or Lincolnshire[1310]. In the preface he states that
he had been collecting and arranging materials for twenty-five years, and
explains his object in writing.
‘Every upright man ought to judge his life by the examples of better men,
because examples strike home more directly than the words of reason.’
Other Orders have lives of their holy brethren; this Chronicle is intended
similarly to edify the Franciscans by giving them some account of those
who have sacrificed their all to enter the Order and observe the Rule of St.
Francis[1311]. From this point of view, chronology was of little importance,
and there is scarcely a date in the whole book. It is impossible to give the
exact date at which the Chronicle was finished; the deaths of William of
Nottingham and of Innocent IV are mentioned[1312]; and the work was
probably not completed before 1260. It is certainly the narrative of a
contemporary, often of an eye-witness, and, apart from the manifest
sincerity of the author, the accuracy of the details can in some instances be
tested by independent and trustworthy authority. To take one example;
Eccleston’s account of the reception of the friars at Cambridge (pp. 17, 18)
may be compared with the following entry in Close Roll 22 Hen. III, m. 12,
(June 15 1238):
Rex ballivis suis de Cantebr’ salutem. Sciatis quod concessimus fratribus
Minoribus de Cantebr’ domum illam cum pertinenciis in Cantebr’ que fuit
Magistri Benjamin Judei et quam prius vobis concesseramus ad Gayolam
nostram (or vestram) inde faciendam, ad clausum domorum predictorum
fratrum dilatandum, salvis domino feodi serviciis et redditibus ei inde
debitis. Et idem vobis precipimus quod eisdem fratribus de domo predicta
plenam saisinam habere faciatis.
The following MSS. of the Chronicle ‘De adventu Fratrum Minorum in
Angliam’ are extant, all dating from the early fourteenth century.
(1) A mutilated MS. in the Chapter Library at York; Brewer’s text for the
earlier portion of the Chronicle is founded on this.

(2) Brit. Mus.: Cotton Nero A ix was used by Brewer as the guide for the
later part: this MS. begins with Collatio IX (i.e. Collatio VIII in the
York MS.).
(3) A fragment of the earlier portion of the Chronicle is contained in a MS.
at Lamport House; this has been printed by Howlett in Mon. Franc. II;
it supplies most of the chapters wanting in the Cottonian MS., of
which it probably formed a part.
(4) No. 3119 of the MSS. of Sir T. Phillipps (Thirlestaine House,
Cheltenham), contains the whole Chronicle, though without many of
the incidents which occur in the York and Cotton MSS. Neither Brewer
nor Howlett knew of its existence. A short account of it will be found
in ‘The English Historical Review,’ Oct. 1890, p. 754.
In the same volume of MSS. is the treatise De impugnatione, etc., printed in
the Appendix C: Bale and Pits ascribe this to Eccleston, but without
sufficient authority.
Roger Bacon is said on the authority of John Rous[1313] to have been born
at or near Ilchester in Dorsetshire. He came of a wealthy perhaps noble
family; he speaks of one brother as rich, of another as a scholar. He was
probably nephew of Robert Bacon the Dominican. Roger’s family espoused
the royal cause in the Barons’ war and suffered great losses[1314]. The year
1214 is usually given as the date of his birth. The date is an inference from
the following passage written in 1267:
‘I have laboured much at sciences and languages, and it is now forty years
since I first learnt the alphabet; and I was always studious; and except for
two of those forty years I have always been in studio[1315].’
The last phrase probably means ‘at a University’ or some place of study.
Boys of ten or twelve years frequently began their education at Oxford, and
it is likely that Bacon went there at an early age[1316]. Roger of Wendover
relates that Friar Robert Bacon preached before the King at Oxford in 1233,
and fearlessly rebuked him for listening to evil counsellors, especially Peter
des Roches. Matthew Paris gives the story with the following addition:
‘a clerk of the court of a pleasant wit, namely, Roger Bacun, ventured to
make this joke: “My lord King, what is most harmful to men crossing a

strait, or what makes them most afraid?” The King replied, “Those men
know who occupy their business in great waters.” “I will tell you,” said the
clerk, “Petrae et Rupes[1317].”’
It cannot be regarded as certain that this Roger Bacon was the famous friar.
The name was not uncommon; e.g. a Roger Bacon, a Thomas Bacon, and a
Peter Bacon occur in Pat. Roll 3 Edw I. On the other hand Roger was
certainly in Oxford in or before this year. He states that St. Edmund,
Archbishop of Canterbury, lectured at Oxford in his time, i.e. Edmund
Riche who became Archbishop in 1233[1318]. At this period too, Roger
attended Grostete’s lectures and made the acquaintance of Adam Marsh, for
both of whom he always retained the greatest admiration. He found in them
that sympathy with and understanding of his experimental method, which
were denied him in later life[1319]. It was doubtless his connexion with these
men that led Roger to enter the Franciscan Order. When or where this took
place is unknown: perhaps at Oxford before the death of Grostete. He had
clearly reached years of discretion when he took the step. This may be
inferred from his denunciation of those who entered the Orders as boys and
begun the study of theology before they had been grounded in
philosophy[1320]. It is also implied in such passages as these:
‘When I was in another state, I wrote nothing on philosophy.’ ‘Men used to
wonder before I became a friar that I lived owing to such excessive
labour[1321].’
He began his studies on positive science before 1250[1322], and had by 1267
spent more than 2,000 librae[1323]
‘on secret books and various experiments and languages and instruments
and tables.’
It is not necessary to assume that this sum was expended before he joined
the Franciscan Order; he could, and undoubtedly did, obtain money by
begging to carry on his experiments[1324]. Roger left Oxford for Paris some
time before 1245; he states that he had seen Alexander of Hales with his
own eyes[1325], and he heard William of Auvergne dispute on the Intellectus
Agens before the whole University: William died in 1248[1326]. Roger was
in France in 1250 when he saw the chief of the Pastoureaux, and remarked
that

‘he carried in his hand something as though it were sacred, as a man carries
relics[1327].’
He is said by Rous to have been made D.D. of Paris and to have been
incorporated as D.D. at Oxford[1328]. When he returned to Oxford is
unknown; probably soon after 1250. He must have lectured at this time; he
won some fame, as he says himself[1329], but without doubt made many
enemies. About the year 1257 or 1258—when Adam Marsh could no longer
protect his great pupil—Roger was exiled from England and kept under
strict supervision in Paris for ten years[1330]. In 1263 he wrote an
astronomical treatise called Computus Naturalium[1331]. Soon after this, a
clerk named Raymund of Laon mentioned Bacon’s name to the Cardinal
Bishop of Sabina and roused the latter’s interest in his discoveries[1332].
Bacon sent a letter in reply to the Cardinal’s communication: this has not
been preserved. In 1265 the Cardinal became Pope Clement IV. On 22nd of
June 1266, Clement wrote requesting Roger to send him a fair copy of the
work which Raymond had mentioned, setting forth the remedies he
proposed, ‘circa illa, quae nuper occasione tanti discriminis intimasti;’ the
friar was to do this, in spite of any constitution of his Order to the contrary,
secretly and without delay[1333]. The Pope’s supposition that the work was
already written was erroneous;
‘for,’ writes Roger[1334], ‘whilst I was in a different state of life, I had
written nothing on science; nor in my present condition had I ever been
required to do so by my superiors; nay, a strict prohibition has been passed
to the contrary, under penalty of forfeiture of the book, and many days’
fasting on bread and water, if any book written by us (i.e. the Franciscans)
should be communicated to strangers[1335].’
However, although the book was not yet written, and notwithstanding
endless difficulties, want of money, want of mathematical and other
instruments and tables, the restrictions of the Rule, jealousy of his superiors
and brethren who, he says,
‘kept me on bread and water, suffering no one to have access to me, fearful
lest my writings should be divulged to any other than the Pope and
themselves[1336]’—

the Opus Majus, the Opus Minus, and the Opus Tertium, were sent to the
Pope within fifteen or eighteen months after the arrival of the papal
mandate[1337]. ‘Such a feat’ says Brewer, ‘is unparalleled in the annals of
literature.’ The Pope probably used his influence in behalf of Roger, as the
latter seems to have returned to England about this time and to have been
freed from annoyance[1338]. The works sent to Clement he regarded merely
as handbooks; at the same time that he was writing them, he was engaged
on a larger work which was to embrace the whole range of sciences as then
understood[1339]. He was working at this in 1271[1340]. His attacks on all
classes, including his own Order, became even more violent than hitherto.
In 1277 and 1278 synods were held at Paris and Oxford to condemn
erroneous doctrines. The repressive movement extended to the Franciscans;
in 1278, Jerome of Ascoli, the Minister General, held a Chapter at Paris,
and among other friars Roger Bacon was condemned ‘propter quasdam
novitates[1341].’ He is believed to have remained in prison for fourteen
years. Jerome of Ascoli, who became Pope Nicholas IV in 1288, died in
1292. Raymond Gaufredi, a man of liberal views, was elected General in
1289, and released many friars who had been imprisoned for their opinions
by his predecessors. In 1292 he held a General Chapter at Paris, and it is
probable that among the friars here set free was Roger Bacon[1342]. It is
certain that the last work of Roger’s of which we have any notice was
written in 1292[1343]. The date usually assigned for his death (1294) is a
pure conjecture[1344]. John Rous says that he was buried among the Friars
Minors at Oxford[1345].
Such then is the chronological outline of his life, as far as it can be
ascertained. A list of his works will be more useful than a short account of
his character or philosophy.
Roger Bacon’s Works were neglected and regarded with a pious horror in
the Middle Ages[1346]. The result is that many of those which have survived
at all have reached us in a fragmentary state. ‘It is easier,’ said Leland, ‘to
collect the leaves of the Sibyl than the titles of the works written by Roger
Bacon.’ The difficulty has to a considerable extent been removed by Mr.
Brewer’s valuable preface to the Opera Inedita, and by the labours of M.
Charles. The following account of Roger Bacon’s works is based chiefly on
these two writers. Some additions have been made and some rearrangement
attempted.

Miscellaneous works, lectures, &c., probably early:—
Computus naturalium, an astronomical treatise, is the earliest work of
Bacon’s to which a date can be assigned; it was written a. d. 1263-4.
Inc. ‘Omnia tempus habent.’
MSS. British Museum: Royal 7 F viii. fol. 99-191 (sec. xiii).
Oxford: University College, 48.
Douai 691, § 2.
Summary printed by Charles, Roger Bacon, pp. 355-8.
De termino Paschali, an earlier work, to which Bacon refers in the
Computus naturalium; (Charles, p. 78).
Questions on Aristotle’s physics.
MS. Amiens 406, f. 1-25; cf. MS. Bodl. Digby 150, fol. 42 (sec. xiii),
‘Summa Baconis.’
Quaestiones super librum physicorum a magistro dicto Bacon.
MS. Amiens 406, fol. 26-73.
De vegetabilibus (gloss on this work then attributed to Aristotle).
MS. Amiens 406 (intercalated in the preceding work).
In Aristotelis Metaphysica.
MS. Amiens 406, fol. 74.
Tractatus ad declaranda quaedam obscure dicta in libro Secreti Secretorum
Aristotelis. Inc. ‘Propter multa in hoc libro contenta qui liber dicitur
Secretum Secretorum Aristotelis sive liber de regimine principum.’
MS. Bodl.: Tanner 116, fol. 1 (sec. xiii exeuntis); the same MS. fol. 16,
contains Aristotle’s supposititious Secretum Secretorum ‘cum glossa
interlineari et notis Rogeri Bacon.’

Questiones naturales mathematice astronomice, &c. ‘Expliciunt
reprobationes Rogeri Baconis.’
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 16089, f. 93 (sec. xiii-xiv).
Bacon in Meteora. Inc. ‘Cum ad noticiam impressionum habendam.’
MS. Bodleian: Digby 190, fol. 38 (sec. xiv ineuntis).
Processus fratris Rogeri Bacon ... de invencione cogitacionis (astrological
fragment). Inc. ‘Notandum quod in omni judicio quatuor sunt
inquirenda, scil. natura planetae.’
MS. Bodl.: Digby 72, fol. 49 b, 50 (sec. xiv-xv).
De somno et vigilia.
MSS. Bodl.: Digby 190, f. 77: Inc. ‘De somno et vigilia pertractantes,
Perypateticorum sentenciam potissime sequemur.’
Cambridge:—Publ. Library Ii, vi. 5, fol. 85 b-88 (sec. xiii). Inc. ‘Sompnus
ergo et vigilia describuntur multis modis.’
Logic:—
Summulae Dialectices, an elementary treatise on logic, characterised by
Charles, who expresses a doubt as to its authenticity, as very dry,
unimportant, and intended for lecturing purposes. Inc. ‘Introductio est
brevis et apta demonstratio.’ ‘Expliciunt sumule magistri Roberti (sic)
Baccun.’
MS. Bodl.: Digby 205, f. 48 (sec. xiv).
Syncategoremata. Inc. ‘Partium orationis quaedam sunt declinabiles.’
MS. Bodl.: Digby 204, fol. 88 (sec. xiv).
Summa de sophismatibus et distinctionibus. Inc. ‘Potest queri de
difficultatibus accidentibus.’
MS. Bodl.: Digby 67, fol. 117 (sec. xiii); fragment.

Tractatus de signis logicalibus. Inc. ‘Signum est in predicamento
relationis.’
MS. Bodl.: Digby 55, fol. 228 (sec. xiii).
Opus Majus, written a. d. 1266-1267; 7 parts. Inc. ‘Sapientiae perfecta
consideratio consistit in duobus.’
MSS. of the whole work: Oxford:—Bodl. Digby 235 (sec. xv and xiv).
Dublin:—Trinity Coll. 81 (= 221); a transcript of this is in Trinity Coll.
Cambridge.
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine 3488 (sec. xviii).
Rome:—Vatican 4086 (Montfaucon’s Catal. p. 114), ‘Rogerii Baconi
causae universales in septem partes distinctae’; probably the Opus
Majus.
Parts I-VI edited by Jebb, 1733: reprinted at Venice 1750.
The parts often occur separately.
I. On the four causes of human ignorance: authority, custom, popular
opinion, and the pride of supposed knowledge.
MS. Brit. Museum: Cott. Jul. F vii. fol. 186.
II. On the causes of perfect wisdom in Holy Scripture, or, On the dignity of
philosophy.
III. On the usefulness of grammar.
This part, Charles points out (p. 62), is not perfect in Jebb’s edition: see
Opus Tertium, cap. XXVI, XXVII.
IV. On the usefulness of mathematics.
MSS. London:—British Museum: Cotton, Tib. C. V. (sec. xiv); Julius D. V.
‘De utilitate scientiarum’; Julius F vii. fol. 178 (sec. xv), ‘Declaratio
effectus verae mathematicae.’ And fol. 180, ‘De moribus hominum
secundum complexiones et constellationes.’

Royal 7 F vii, p. 1 (sec. xiii), ‘Pars quarta compendii studii theologiae’; pp.
82-125, ‘Descriptiones locorum’; pp. 133-140, ‘De utilitate astronomiae,’ or
‘Tractatus de corporibus coelestibus.’
Sloane 2629, f. 17, ‘De utilitate astronomiae.’
Also Lambeth Palace Library 200 (sec. xv), ‘De arte mathematica.’
Oxford:—Bodl. E Musaeo 155, p. 185 (sec. xv ineuntis), ‘Pars quarta in qua
ostendit potestatem mathematicae in scientiis et rebus et
occupationibus hujus mundi.’ Univ. Coll. 49 (sec. xvii).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 7455 A (sec. xv), ‘De utilitatibus scientiae mathematicae
verae.’
Cf. Bodl.: Digby 218, f. 98 (sec. xiii-xiv).
Printed, except the last two chapters, by Combach, Frankfurt 1614, under
the title: ‘Specula Mathematica in quibus de specierum multiplicatione
... agitur,’ &c.
V. Perspective and Optics.
MSS. London:—Brit. Mus.: Royal 7 F vii. p. 125 (sec. xiii), ‘De visu et
speculis’; 7 F viii. f. 47 (sec. xiii), ‘Perspectiva quedam singularis,’
‘Perspectiva R. Bacon, liber secundus.’ Sloane 2156, f. 1 (a. d. 1428),
and 2542 (sec. xv): Addit. 8786, f. 84, ‘Incipit tractatus de modis
videndi.’
Oxford:—Bodl. Digby 77 (sec. xiv) and 91 (sec. xvi).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 2598, f. 57 (sec. xv).
Venice:—St. Mark, Classis XI, Cod. 10 (sec. xiv).
Rome:—Vatican (Cod. Lat.) 828, f. 49 (a. d. 1349).
Printed by Combach, Frankfurt 1614, under the title, ‘Rogerii Baconis
Angli ... Perspectiva.’
VI. Experimental Science.

MSS. Brit. Mus.: Sloane 2629 (sec. xvi), extracts.
Oxford:—Bodl.: Digby 235, p. 389; Canon. Misc. 334, fol. 53, ‘Alius
tractatus ejusdem Fratris Rogeri extractus de sexta parte compendii studii
theologiae.’ Univ. Coll. 49.
VII. Moral Philosophy. Inc. ‘Manifestavi in precedentibus quod cognitio
linguarum.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 8 F ii. f. 167-179 (sec. xv), three parts out of six.
Bodl.: Digby 235, p. 421[1347].
Omitted in Jebb’s edition: extracts printed by Charles, pp. 339-348. Printed
at Dublin 1860 (?)[1348].
Opus Minus, written in 1266-7, was mainly an abstract of the Opus Majus
with some additions on the state of scholasticism, on alchemy practical
and speculative, and on astronomy. Charles gives the following
description of it. It consisted of 6 parts:
i. Introduction or dedicatory letter; ii. Practical alchemy; iii. Explanation of
the Opus Majus; the order of the sciences inverted, i.e. they were arranged
according to their dignity, moral philosophy first; iv. Treatise on the seven
sins of Theology; v. Speculative alchemy, or, De rerum generationibus (see
below); vi. De Coelestibus.
Of this work only the fragment edited by Brewer (Opera Ined. 311-390)
from MS. Bodl. Digby 218, has been discovered. This includes a few pages
of Part ii., all of iii., most of iv., and part of v. Wood quotes a passage from
the Opus Minus which does not occur in this fragment (Opera Ined. xciv. n.
1). From this it has been assumed that he had access to a MS. of the Opus
Minus now lost; but the passage is quoted by Leland, and probably copied
from him by Wood. It may perhaps occur in some other work of Bacon’s;
thus the passage quoted in Op. Ined. pp. xcvii-xcviii, from which Brewer
argues that ‘Wood must have seen some other copy of the Opus Minus not
now discoverable,’ occurs in Brewer’s edition of the Opus Tert. pp. 272-3.
Part of the blank on p. 375 is to be filled up from the Opus Majus, Pars VI,
Exemplum II, where the passage ‘Est autem—curabit et’ occurs, word for

word. How much of the Opus Majus was here inserted is doubtful; probably
to the end of Exemplum II. Thus MS. Bodl. Canonic. Miscell. 334, f. 53,
begins with the words, ‘Corpora vero Adae et Evae,’ Opus Minus, p. 373,
and leaves off with the words, ‘et alibi multis modis,’ which occur at the
end of Opus Majus, Pars VI, Exemp. II.
The last part of the Opus Minus is wholly wanting in Brewer’s edition. The
subject of this part may be gathered from Bacon’s words in Opus Tert., cap.
xxvi (p. 96):
‘Nunc igitur tangam aliquas radices circa haec quas diligentius exposui in
Secundo Opere, ubi de coelestibus egi’: and (p. 99) ‘Sed in Opere Minore
ubi de coelestibus tractavi, exposui magis ista.’
In Digby MS. 76, fol. 36 seq. (sec. xiii) is a treatise on this subject, forming
part of the Physics in the great Compendium Philosophiae (see below). It is
not improbable, that, before being incorporated in this larger work, it
formed part of the Opus Minus sent to the Pope; on fol. 42 are the words:
‘et est nunc temporis scilicet anno domini 1266.’
Opus Tertium, written in 1267 (see Opera Ined. p. 277), 75 chapters.
MSS. London:—Brit. Mus: Cotton Tiberius C. V. (sec. xiv); also Lambeth
Palace Library, 200 (chapters 1-45).
Oxford:—Bodl. E Musaeo 155 (sec. xv ineuntis); and Univ. Coll. 49 (a. d.
1617).
Cambridge:—Trinity College, MS. Gale (transcript of the Cotton MS.).
Douai, 691 (sec. xvii), wanting chapters 38-52: this MS. has been described
by Victor Cousin, Journal des Savants for 1848 (5 articles).
Printed in Bacon’s Opera Inedita (Rolls Series), pp. 3-310.
Charles has been misled by a passage in the work called ‘Communia
Naturalium’ into thinking that this latter formed part of the Opus Tertium;
Charles, R. Bacon, pp. 65, 83-4; his description of Opus Tertium is
consequently erroneous. The passage is from the Mazarine MS. of the
Communia Naturalium (i.e. No. 3576), fol. 85:

‘Quod est improbatum in secunda parte primi operis, deinde in hoc tertio
opere explanavi hoc et solvi objectiones.’
These words refer to Bacon’s doctrine that the intellectus agens is not part
of the soul, but God and angels. This is insisted on in the Opus Tertium, cap.
xxiii, and it is not likely that Bacon would do more than refer to it again
casually in the course of the same work. The relation of the Opus Tertium to
the Commun. Nat. is probably as follows: the latter was written or begun
first. Bacon repeatedly mentions that he was, while writing his three Opera
for the Pope, engaged on a larger work, Scriptum Principale, which he did
not send to Clement[1349]. Much of this larger work naturally found its way,
probably in a summarised form, into the Opus Tertium as we know it, the
treatise actually sent to the Pope.
Tractatus de multiplicatione specierum, or, De generatione specierum et
multiplicatione et corruptione earum, is inserted by Jebb in the Opus
Majus, pp. 358-445, between Part v and Part vi. The subject is
however discussed in Part iv, which is often quoted or referred to in
Part v. In the De multiplicatione, &c. (p. 368), are the words:
Ut tactum est in communibus naturalium.
Again (p. 358):
Recolendum est igitur quod in tertia parte hujus operis tactum est, quod
essentia, substantia, natura, potestas, potentia, virtus, vis, significant
eandem rem, sed differunt sola comparatione.
There is nothing about this in the third part of the Opus Majus; but it is
found in the Communia Naturalium. The treatise De multiplicatione
specierum was therefore part of a work of which the Communia Naturalium
formed the third part. This large work was according to Jebb, the Opus
Minus; according to Charles, the Opus Tertium[1350]; according to Brewer,
the encyclopaedic Compendium Philosophiae. Brewer is no doubt right; the
De multiplicatione was intended as a sub-section of the great treatise on
Physics.
How then did the treatise come to be regarded as part of the Opus Majus,
and to be inserted in the MSS. of that work? There can be little doubt that it
was, in its original form, the treatise on rays sent to the Pope with the Opus

Majus, but as a separate work (Opera Ined. pp. 227, 230). The references to
the Communia Naturalium are not inconsistent with this hypothesis: (1) the
treatise on rays does not seem to have been written specially for the Pope,
and consequently references to works which he could not know were not
unnatural; (2) Bacon had already begun the encyclopaedic work, but found
it impossible to get it finished or send it to the Pope (Opera Inedita, pp. 60,
315).
Inc. ‘Primum igitur capitulum circa influentiam agentis habet tres veritates.’
MSS. London:—Brit. Mus.: Royal 7 F viii. f. 13; inc. ‘Postquam habitum,’
&c. Addit. 8786, fol. 20 b: inc. ‘Postquam habitum est de principiis
rerum naturalium’: Sloane 2156, f. 40 (a. d. 1428); inc. ‘Postquam,’
&c.
Oxford:—Bodl. Digby 235, p. 305 (inserted in the Opus Majus).
Dublin:—Trinity Coll. 81 (in the Opus Majus).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 2598 (sec. xv): inc. ‘Postquam,’ &c.
Bruges, 490 (sec. xiii), called Philosophia Baconis.
Printed in Jebb.
De speculis (on burning mirrors). Inc. ‘Ex concavis speculis ad solem
positis ignis accenditur.’

MS. Oxford:—Bodl. Ashmole, 440 (sec. xvi); cf. Digby 71.
Printed at Frankfurt 1614, in Combach’s Specula Mathematica, p. 168.
Speculi Abnukefi compositio secundum Rogerium Bacon. Inc. ‘Quia
universorum quos de speculis ad datam distanciam.’
MS. Bodl.: Canonic. Misc. 408, fol. 48.
Cf. Brit. Mus. Cott. Vesp. A ii. f. 140.
Compendium Philosophiae, an encyclopaedic work, which if completed
would have formed a kind of revised and enlarged edition of the Opus
Majus, Opus Minus, and Opus Tertium. In the Communia Naturalium,
cap. i. (MS. Bodl. Digby 70) Bacon gives a sketch of his plan. The
work was to consist of four volumes, and to treat of six branches of
knowledge, viz., vol. i. Grammar and Logic; vol. ii. Mathematics; vol.
iii. Physics; vol. iv. Metaphysics and Morals. This Compendium seems
to have been known also as Liber sex scientiarum. The latter title is
found in the collection printed at Frankfurt in 1603[1351] in MSS. Bodl.
Canonic. Misc. No. 334, fol. 49 b; ibid., No. 480, fol. 33; and E
Musaeo 155, p. 689. In each of these MSS. the same passage is quoted,
as follows:

Dicta fratris Rogerii Bacon in libro sex scienciarum in 3o gradu sapiencie,
ubi loquitur de bono corporis et de bono fortune et de bono et honestate
morum. (Inc.) In debito regimine corporis et prolongatione vite ad ultimos
terminos naturales ... miranda potestas astronomie alkimie et perspective et
scienciarum experimentalium. Sciendum igitur est pro bono corporis quod
homo fuit immortalis naturaliter ... (Expl.) ut fiant sublimes operaciones et
utilissime in hoc mundo, etc.
Charles identifies the Liber sex scientiarum with the Opus Minus; but this
passage does not occur in the extant portion of the Opus Minus which deals
with the same subject and expresses the same ideas (Opera Ined., p. 370
seq.). It seems probable therefore that this passage is an extract from the
section on Alchemy in vol. iii. of the Compendium Philosophiae.

Vol. I. Grammar and Logic. A portion of this has been edited by Brewer,
Opera Ined., pp. 393-519, under the title Compendium Studii
Philosophiae. It was written in 1271, and contains an introduction on
the value of knowledge and the impediments to it, and the beginning of
a treatise on grammar.
MS. Cott. Tiberius C. V. (sec. xiv).
Two other treatises on grammar by Roger Bacon are extant, and probably
formed part of the Comp. Phil.[1352]:
(1) Inc. ‘Primus hic liber voluminis grammatici circa linguas alias a
Latino.... Manifestata laude et declarata utilitate cognitionis grammatice’
(chiefly on Greek grammar).
MSS. Brit. Museum: Cotton Jul. F viii. f. 175 (sec. xv), a fragment.
Oxford:—Corpus Christi Coll. 148 (sec. xv); Univ. Coll. 47 (sec. xvii).
Douai, 691 § 1 (sec. xvii), copied from Univ. Coll. MS. 47.
(2) Inc. ‘Oratio grammatica autem fit mediante verbo.’ ‘Explicit summa de
grammatica magistri Rogeri Bacon.’
MS. Cambridge:—Peterhouse, 1, 9, 5, James 3 (sec. xiv).
Vol. II. Mathematics; 6 books:
i. Communia mathematicae, ii-vi. Special branches of mathematics.
Liber i. Inc. ‘Hic incipit volumen verae mathematicae habens sex libros.
Primus est de communibus mathematicae, et habet tres partes principales.’
MSS. British Museum: Sloane 2156, f. 74-97 (sec. xv), ending in the
second part of the first book.
Bodl.: Digby 76, fol. 48 (sec. xiii), containing the remainder of the first
book (?). Inc. ‘Mathematica utitur tantum parte.’
Libri ii-vi. An extant fragment of a commentary on Euclid by Bacon may
have belonged to this part; in De Coelestibus (Comp. Phil. vol. iii.) he often
refers to his commentary on the Elements of Euclid (Charles, p. 85).

MS. Digby 76, f. 77-8 (sec. xiii).
A treatise, De laudibus mathematicae, expressing the same ideas as Part iv.
of the Opus Majus, may have been intended as an introduction to this
volume.
MS. Royal 7 F vii. fol. 141-152: cf. Digby 218, f. 98.
Vol. III. Physics. First came general physics (1 book), then particular
sciences (3 books).
Liber i. Communia Naturalium, divided into 4 parts.
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 7 F vii. f. 84 (sec. xiii), Liber Naturalium. ‘Hoc est
volumen naturalis philosophiae in quo traditur scientia rerum
naturalium, secundum potestatem octo scientiarum naturalium quae
enumerantur in secundo capitulo; et habet hoc volumen quatuor libros
principales, Primum scilicet De communibus ad omnia naturalia;
secundum De Coelestibus; tertium De Elementis, mixtis, inanimatis;
quartum De vegetabilibus et generabilibus.’ (This MS. ends at the third
part of the first book).
Bodl.: Digby 70 (sec. xiv). Communia Naturalium. Inc. ‘Postquam tradidi
grammaticam’ [Desinit ad init. cap. vii].
Cf. Digby 190, f. 29 (sec. xiv ineuntis). De principiis naturae; beginning
illegible.
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine 3576; olim 1271, f. 1-90 (sec. xiv). ‘Incipit liber
primus Communium naturalium Fratris Rogeri Bacon, habens quatuor
partes principales, quarum prima habet distinctiones quatuor. Prima
distinctio est de communibus ad omnia naturalia et habet capitula
quatuor. Capitulum primum de ordine scientiae naturalis ad alias.
(Inc.) Postquam tradidi grammaticam secundum linguas diversas.’
Extracts printed by Charles, pp. 369-391.
Libri ii, iii, iv. The special natural sciences, according to the Royal MS. just
quoted, were treated in three books. They were seven[1353] in number, as
Bacon enumerates them in the second chapter of the first part of the
Communia Naturalium.

‘Praeter scientiam communem naturalibus, sunt septem speciales, videlicet
perspectiva, astronomia judiciaria et operativa, scientia ponderum de
gravibus et levibus, alkimia, agricultura, medicina, scientia experimentalis.’
Liber ii. (1) Optics or Perspective (a version of the De multiplicatione
specierum). Inc. ‘Ostensum quippe in principio hujus Compendii
Philosophiae.’
MSS. Brit. Mus: Royal 7 F vii. p. 221 (sec. xiii), fragment, called ‘Quinta
pars Compendii theologiae’; and Addit. 8786, fol. 2 (fragment).
[Cf. Bodl. Digby 183, fol. 49 (sec. xiv)?]
See the references under Tract. de multiplicatione specierum.
(2) Astronomy, or, De coelo et mundo.
MSS. Oxford:—Bodl. Digby 76, f. 1 (sec. xiii), Compendium Philosophiae.
Inc. ‘Prima igitur veritas circa corpora mundi est quod non est unum
corpus continuum et unius nature.’ Ibid. fol. 36, De corporibus
coelestibus, sc. de zodiaco, sole, etc. Inc. ‘Habito de corporibus mundi
prout mundum absolute constituunt’ (cf. Opus Minus). Cf. Ashmole
393 I, f. 44 (sec. xv), ‘Veritates de magnitudine ... planetarum.
Tractatus extractus de libris celi et mundi,’ etc. Also, Univ. Coll. 49,
De corporibus coelestibus.
Paris:—Mazarine 3576, De coelestibus (five chapters). Inc. ‘Prima igitur
veritas.’
(3) Gravity, Scientia ponderum de gravibus et levibus.
Cf. Tractatus trium verborum.
Liber iii. (4) Alchemy, or, De elementis[1354].
Liber iv. De vegetabilibus et generabilibus[1355].
(5) Agriculture.
See note in Brewer, Opera Ined. p. li.
(6) Medicine.

(7) Experimental Science.
Vol. IV. Metaphysics and Morals.
Inc. ‘Quoniam intencio principalis est innuere nobis vicia studii theologici
que contracta sunt ex curiositate philosophie.’
MSS. Bodl.: Digby 190, fol. 86 b (sec. xiii-xiv). ‘Methaphisica fratris
Rogeri ordinis Fratrum Minorum, de viciis contractis in studio
theologie’ (25 lines).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 7440 (sec. xiv), fol. 38-40, fol. 25-32. ‘Incipit
metaphysica Rogeri Baconis de ordine praedicatorum’ (fragment).
It is, however, probable that these MS. fragments ought to be referred to
Bacon’s last work, the Compendium Studii Theologiae, rather than to the
Compendium Philosophiae.
Compendium studii theologiae, Bacon’s last work, bears the date 1292
(‘usque ad hunc annum Domini 1292’). Extracts from it are printed by
Charles, pp. 410-416. This work consisted of six parts or more.
Part i. On the causes of error.
Part ii. Logic and grammar in reference to theology.
These two parts are extant (though not complete) in MS. British Museum,
Royal F vii. pp. 153-161: there is a long gap between pp. 154 and 155.
According to this MS. the work consisted of two parts:
‘Incipit compendium studii theologiae et per consequens philosophiae ut
potest et debet servire theologicae facultati, et habet duas partes
principales; prima liberali communicatione sapientiae investigat omnes
causas errorum, et modos errandi in hoc studio.... Secunda pars
descendit ad veritates stabiliendas et ad errores cum diligentia
exterminandos.’
Part v. is preserved in Royal MS. 7 F. viii. f. 2 (sec. xiii) (almost complete);
it is a treatise on optics.

Incipit: ‘Acto prologo istius quintae partis hujus voluminis quam voco
compendium studii theologiae, in quo quidem comprehendo in summa
intentionem totius operis, extra partem ejus signans omnia
impedimenta totius studii et remedia, nunc accedo ad tractatum
exponens ea quae necessaria sunt theologiae de perspectiva et de visu.’
Part vi. is mentioned in Part v.: it is to be a treatise, ‘De multiplicatione
Specierum.’
In Part iv. also the words ‘in partibus sequentibus’ occur.
Alchemy was treated in the Opus Minus and in the Compendium
Philosophiae. Bacon divides it into (1) Speculative alchemy, ‘the science of
the generation of things from elements’; (2) Practical alchemy, ‘which
teaches us how to make noble metals and colours,’ &c., and the art of
prolonging life (Opus Tertium, cap. xii). Wood mentions a treatise of
Bacon’s De rerum generationibus, of which he had seen two copies varying
much. These may have been the versions in the Opus Minus[1356] and the
Compendium Philosophiae[1357]. A number of works on alchemy and
medicine ascribed to Bacon have been preserved, some of them are
undoubtedly genuine, others apocryphal.
Epistolae fratris Rogerii Baconis de secretis operibus artis et naturae et de
nullitate magiae [or, De mirabili potestate artis et naturae].
The work consists of a letter or collection of letters in ten or eleven
chapters, the last five of which Charles considers doubtful, addressed
perhaps to William of Auvergne (who died in 1248), or to John of London,
whom Charles identifies with John of Basingstoke (d. 1252).
Inc. cap. 1. ‘Vestrae petitioni respondeo diligenter. Nam licet.’
MS. Brit. Mus: Sloane 2156, p. 117.
Printed at Paris 1542; at Oxford 1594; Hamburg 1613; in Zetzner’s
Theatrum Chemicum, 1659; and by Brewer in Rog. Bacon Opera
Inedita, App. I.
The three following treatises were printed at Frankfurt in 1603, under the
title, Sanioris medicinae magistri D. Rogeri Baconis angli de arte chymiae

scripta, &c., and elsewhere.
Summary of Avicenna’s De anima. Inc. ‘In illius nomine qui major est.’
MS. Bodl: Ashmole 1467 (sec. xvi). [Cf. Charles, R. Bacon, p. 59; Opera
Ined. p. 39.]
Breve Breviarium, or, De naturis metallorum in ratione alkimica et
artificiali transformatione, or, Coelestis alchymia, or, De naturis
metallorum et ipsorum transmutatione.
Divided into two parts, speculative and practical alchemy; the work
contains no doubt some of the ideas incorporated in the Opus Minus and the
Comp. Philosophiae. The date is uncertain.
Inc. ‘Breve breviarium breviter abbreviatum.’
MSS. Brit. Mus: Sloane 276, f. 4 (sec. xv-xvi).
Bodl.: Digby 119, fol. 64 (sec. xiv); and Bodl. E Musaeo 155, p. 513.
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. new Latin collection, No. 1153. (Abbey of St. Germain).
Tractatus trium verborum, or, Epistolae tres ad Johannem Parisiensem;
namely:
i. ‘De separatione ignis ab oleo,’ or, ‘De modo projectionis’; ii. ‘De modo
miscendi’; iii. ‘De ponderibus.’ Inc. ‘Cum ego Rogerus rogatus a pluribus.’
MSS. British Museum: Cotton Julius D. V.; Harleian 3528, f. 174; Sloane
1754, ‘Mendacium primum, secundum, et tertium.’
Oxford:—Bodl: Digby 119, f. 82 (sec. xiv ineuntis); Ashmole 1448, pp. 1-
25 (sec. xv); Corpus Christi Coll. 125, f. 84b; University Coll. 49.
Fragment on alchemy, without title.
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 2598, f. 138 (sec. xv), ‘Explicit de subjecto
transmutationis secundum Rogerum Bachonis.’ It perhaps occurs in
one of his larger works.

Libellus Rogerii Baconi ... de retardandis senectutis accidentibus et de
sensibus conservandis (11 chapters). This work is assigned by Charles
to the year 1276. Inc. prol. ‘Domine mundi ex nobilissima stirpe
originem assumpsistis.’ Inc. cap. 1. (De causis senectutis). ‘Senescente
mundo senescunt homines.’
MSS. Brit. Museum: Sloane 2320, fol. 56.
Bodl.: E Musaeo 155, pp. 591-637 (sec. xiv-xv); Canonic. Misc. 334, fol. 1
(sec. xv); and 480, fol. 1 (sec. xv).
Printed at Oxford in 1596 (and in English, London 1683).
Antidotarius, a second part of this work. Inc. ‘Post completum universalis
sciencie medicacionis tractatum.’

MSS. Bodl.: Canonic. Miscell. 334 (fol. 21b to 25), and 480 (fol. 16); E
Musaeo 155, p. 645. Cf. MS. Canon. Misc. 480, fol. 38b-47, below.
Liber Bacon de sermone rei admirabilis, sive de retardatione senectutis.
Inc. ‘Intendo componere sermonem rei admirabilis domino meo fratri
E, cujus vitam deus prolonget.’
MSS. Bodl.: E Musaeo 155, pp. 655-666; Digby 183, fol. 45 (sec. xiv
exeuntis); Canonic. Miscell. 334, fol. 25-31.
De universali regimine senum et seniorum. Inc. ‘Summa regiminis senum
universalis est hoc ut dicit Avicenna.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Sloane 2629, fol. 57.

Bodl.: Canon. Miscell. 334, fol. 18b-21b; 480 (explicit fol. 16); and E
Musaeo 155, p. 638.
De graduacione medicinarum compositarum. Inc. ‘Omnis forma inherens.’

MSS. Bodl. Canon. Misc. 334, fol. 32; 480; fol. 23b (the author’s name is
obliterated in the MS.).
Tractatus de erroribus medicorum[1358]. Inc. ‘Vulgus medicorum.’

MSS. Oxford: Bodl. Canon. Misc. 334, fol. 42; 480, fol. 30 (author’s name
obliterated); E Musaeo 155, pp. 669-689. Corpus Ch. Coll. 127 (sec
xv).
Canones practici de medicinis compositis componendis, ‘Cap. i. Extractum
de libro septimo Serapionis qui est antidotarium suum et est theoricum
capitulum.’ (13 chapters.) Inc. ‘Necesse est illi qui vult componere
medicinas.’ ‘Explicit tractatus de compositione medicinarum per
fratrem rugerium bacon editus.’

MS. Bodl. Canon. Misc. 480, fol. 38b-47.
De leone viridi (on the manufacture of mercury); only the summary by
Raymund Gaufredi is extant. Inc. ‘Verbum abbreviatum.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.:—Sloane 692, f. 46 (sec. xv). Oxford:—Corpus Chr. Coll.
277. Printed at Frankfurt, 1603 (Sanioris medicinae, p. 264), &c.
A number of works on alchemy are attributed to Roger Bacon erroneously
or without any probability.
De consideratione quintae essentiae; 3 books.
The author was a Franciscan who entered the Order at Toulouse[1359]. Inc.
opus. ‘Dixit Salomon sapientie cap. vii. Deus dedit mihi.’

MSS. Bodl.: Canonic. Misc. 334, fol. 59b. ‘Primus liber de consideracione
quinte essencie omnium rerum transmutabilium. In nomine domini
nostri Jhesu Christi. Incipit liber de famulatu philosophie ewangelio
domini Jhesu Christi et pauperibus euangelicis viris Amen.’ Fol. 94b,
‘Explicit liber quinte essencie secundum fratrem Rogerium Bacun de
ordine minorum.’
Bodl. E Musaeo 155, pp. 431-507. ‘Explicit liber tertius de consideracione
5te essencie secundum magistrum Rogerum Bacon, correctus et
scriptus per Johannem Cokkes manibus suis propriis Oxon[1360].’
Brit. Museum: Sloane 2320, f. 73 (sec. xv-xvi).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 7151 (xv).

Venice:—St. Mark, vol. IV. CI. XIV., Cod. 39.
De expulsione veneni. Inc. ‘Ista subscripta sequerentur post capitulum de
hiis que expellunt venenum.’
MS. Bodl. E Musaeo 155, p. 507 (not expressly ascribed to Bacon in the
MS.: see Brewer, Op. Ined. p. xl.).
Speculum alchemiae. Inc. ‘Multifariam multisque modis.’
MSS. Brit. Museum: Addit. 8786, f. 62; 15,549; Sloane 3506 (English
translation).
Bodl.: Ashmole 1416, f. 101 (sec. xv).
Printed in Zetzner’s Theatrum Chemicum, vol. ii., a. d. 1659; in Manget’s
Theasurus, vol. i., &c., &c.
Speculum alchemiae. Inc. ‘Speculum alchemiae quod in corde meo
figuravi.’
MS. Brit. Mus.: Harl. 3528, fol. 185.
Speculum secretorum, or, Liber secretorum. Inc. ‘In nomine Domini ... ad
instructionem multorum circa hanc artem.’

MSS. Brit. Mus.: Sloane 513, f. 178b (sec. xv).

Oxford:—Bodl.: Digby 28, f. 61 (sec. xiv); Digby 119, f. 90b; Ashmole
1467, f. 208b, and 1485, p. 117 (sec. xvi). Also Corpus Christi Coll.
125, f. 86.
Printed at Frankfurt, 1603 (p. 387).
Secretum secretorum naturae de laude lapidis Philosophorum. Inc.
‘Secretum secretorum naturae audiant secreti quae loquor.’
Printed at Frankfurt, 1603 (pp. 285-291).
Rogerina major et minor, two medical treatises; neither by Bacon: one is by
a Roger Baron.

MSS. Bodl. 2626; Cf. MS. St. Omer 624 (sec. xiii); Charles, R. Bacon, p.
75, note.
Cambridge, Publ. Libr. Ii, I. 16 (sec. xiv) and Ee, II. 20.
Brit. Mus.: Sloane 342, f. 146 (sec. xiii).
De Magnete. Inc. ‘Amicorum intime, quamdam magnetis lapidis.’
MS. Bodl. E Musaeo 155, pp. 414-426 (anon.): Charles (p. 18) ascribes it to
Peter de Maricourt.
Calendar, wrongly attributed to Bacon; made by a Minorite at Toledo 1297,
and extracted from the Tabulae Toletanae.
MS. Cott. Vesp. A. II. f. 2; Cf. Opus Majus p. 140 (ed. Venet, 1750).
Semita recta alchemiae (or, Liber duodecim aquarum).

MS. Brit. Mus.: Sloane 513, f. 181b-188b (sec. xv): ‘Explicit semita recta
alkemie secundum Magistrum Rogerum Bakun.’
Cf. MS. Sloane 276, f. 21, an anonymous work on the same subject,
differing somewhat from the above.
Bodl.: Ashmole 1485, pp. 173-188 (sec. xvi), ‘Liber aquarum.’
Thesaurus spirituum, four treatises on the influence of planets, &c. Inc.
‘Hec est doctrina omnium experimentorum.’
MS. Brit. Museum: Sloane 3853, f. 3-40 (sec. xv). ‘Hec est tabula libri
sequentis ... a quodam viro venerabili ordinis Minorum fratre summa
composita et ordinata, et a diligencia M. Rogero Bakon ordinis
Minorum nuper recognita, qui quidem liber pro omnibus hujus mundi
experimentis sufficit,’ &c.
‘Explicit liber qui secundum Robertum Turconem et Rogerum Bakon
fratrem Minorum Thesaurus spirituum nuncupatur.’

Cf. MS. Sloane 3850, f. 129b, De nigromantia, extracted from the above.
De fistula.

MS. Sloane 238, f. 214b-216b (sec. xv). ‘Secundum Rogerum Bacon ut
habetur in libro qui dicitur Thesaurus pauperum[1361].’
Necromanciae. Inc. ‘Debes mundare manus et pedes ante visionem
characterum.’

MS. Sloane 3884, f. 44b (sec. xv-xvi): ‘Haec sunt quae Rogerus Bacon de
pura necromancia dixit.’
Other worthless recipes, fragments, &c., attributed to Bacon will be found
in MSS:—
Bodl. 3, 349, ‘Index simplicium’; Ashmole 1423, iv. pp. 1-7 ‘Opus,’ ‘Opus
Commune,’ ‘De conclusionibus’; Sloane 692, f. 102, ‘Finalis
conclusio’; Harl. 2269, art. I; Cott. Jul. D. V. ‘De colore faciendo’;
Digby 196, f. 163b, ‘Septem virtutes naturae’; Ashmole 1485 (sec. xv),
various.
De intellectu et intelligentia, and De nutrimento, which Charles considers
genuine, are printed among the works of Albertus Magnus.
MSS. Bodl.: Digby 67, f. 107 (sec. xiv), anon: and Digby 55, f. 193, anon:
Alb. Magnus, Opera, V. p. 239 and 175 (Lugd. 1657).
Tractatus de veritate theologiae in septem partes distributus, perhaps by
Robert Bacon. Inc. ‘Flecto genua mea ad patrem domini nostri Jesu
Christi.’
MS. Bodley 745 (= 2764) (sec. xiv) pp. 113-188: ‘Incipit tractatus fratris
B.’ Part i. de trinitate dei; ii. de creatura dei; iii. de corruptela peccati;
iv. de incarnacione verbi; v. de gratia spiritus sancti; vi. de medicina
sacramentali; vii. de statu finalis judicii.
Tractatus super Psalterium, probably by Robert Bacon.
MS. ibid. pp. 193-497. ‘Incipit tractatus fratris R. Bacun, super psalterium.
Beatus vir qui.’
Excerptiones Rogeri Bacon ex auctoribus musicae artis; or correctly,
Excerptiones Hogeri abbatis, &c.

MS. Cambridge:—Corp. Chr. Coll. 260 (olim 189).
Cf. MS. Milan:—Ambrosiana, Rogerii de Baccono de generatione et
corruptione, de Musica, de prospectiva (Montfaucon, p. 523). Cf.
Opera Inedita, 295 seq.
De sacrae scripturae profundis misteriis authore Rogero Bacon.
MS. London:—Gray’s Inn, 17 (sec. xv); the title is in a later hand. It is
probably a version of the Expositiones Vocabulorum de singulis libris
Bibliae Rogeri compotistae monachi S. Eadmundi;
MSS. Oxford:—Bodl. Laud. Misc. 176 (sec. xiv); Magd. Coll. 112 (sec.
xv).
John, Roger Bacon’s favourite pupil, was certainly not John of
London[1362], or John Peckham[1363]. On the other hand it is impossible to
identify him with any known scholastic doctor. It is not certain whether he
was a friar or whether he was ever at Oxford. About 1260 Roger Bacon
found him probably at Paris, as a poor boy of fifteen eager to learn, but
forced to beg his bread and to serve those who gave him the necessaries of
life[1364].
‘I caused him,’ says Roger[1365], ‘to be taken care of and instructed for the
love of God.’
The boy repaid his master’s care. Wishing to send a fit interpreter of his
works to the Pope, Bacon writes[1366],
‘I chose a youth whom for five or six years I have had instructed in
languages and mathematics and optics, in which is all the difficulty of what
I send; and I instructed him gratis with my own mouth after I received your
command, feeling that I could not at present have another messenger after
my own heart.’
There was no one at Paris who knew so much of the roots of philosophy as
did juvenis Johannes; he was ‘a virgin, not knowing mortal sin,’ and ‘an
excellent keeper of secrets[1367].’ John was sent to Clement with the Opus
Majus and other treatises[1368] in 1267, the other works, Opus Minus and
Opus Tertium, being sent later and probably by other messengers. From this

time we have no authentic information about him, and do not know whether
he fulfilled Bacon’s expectations:
‘he has that which will enable him to surpass all the Latins, if he lives to old
age and builds on the foundations which he has[1369].’
Robert de Ware, in Hertfordshire[1370], entered the Order at Oxford
between 1265 and 1268. In the prologue of his only extant work, addressed
to his younger brother John, he gives the following account of his
conversion[1371]:—
I was the eldest son of my father; at a tender age, tenderly beloved, I was
designed for a life of study. At length I came to Oxford, and then I entered
the Order of Friars Minors. At this my father was exceedingly grieved, and
did all in his power to force me to leave the Order, sending my mother and
brother and relatives and other friends to me, with intreaties and promises;
and, I am told, with the help of some powerful persons, he made every
exertion to secure my liberation in the court of Ottobon, who was then
acting as legate in England[1372]. At length finding himself thwarted because
I would not give my consent, he became so embittered against me that he
absolutely refused to see me or speak with me, nor could any of my friends
pacify him. One day even, when I had come to his gates with my
companion-friar, and wished to enter, he refused me admittance by his
servants, drew his sword, and swore with a mighty oath that he would kill
me if I presumed to enter.
At length the father was stricken down by a mortal disease, and, warned in
a vision, he relented towards his son. The latter was summoned hastily from
London, and reconciled to his father, who before his death gave proof of his
devotion to the Order of St. Francis.
Twenty-five discourses on the Virgin Mary, by friar Robert de Ware. Inc.
prol. “Aue rosarium scripturarum per areolas.”
MS. London:—Gray’s Inn, 7, f. 62-138: (sec. xiii). No title; the name of the
author is given in a hand of the fourteenth century.
Walter de Landen, William Cornish, William de Wykham, Dyonisius,
and Robert de Cap(e)ll, were Franciscans at Oxford, and took part in the

controversy with the Dominicans in 1269. All that is known about them will
be found in Appendix C.
Nicholas de Gulac was at Oxford in 1269. Suffering from stone and
despairing of life, he at length prayed the Lord
‘to cure him by the merits of his martyr Earl Simon de Montfort.’
On the next morning as he rose from his bed ‘ut commingeret,’ the stone fell
at his feet, and he had no pain before or afterwards, being completely cured
on Easter Tuesday, 1269; to this miracle witness was borne by the whole
convent of Minorites at Oxford[1373].
Laurence of Cornwall, to whose miraculous recovery from fever, after
prayer to Simon de Montfort, the same Friar N. de Gulac bore witness, was
probably at Oxford about the same time[1374].
Stephanus Hibernicus, called also Stephen of Exeter and Stephen of
Oxford, was born in 1246, and became a Minorite at ‘Mutifernana’ in 1263.
These facts are contained in the Annales Montis Fernandi (sive
Minoritarum Multifernanae) ab ao 45 usque ad an. 1274, the authorship of
which is usually ascribed to Stephen[1375]. It is very doubtful whether he
was at Oxford.
The Annales are extant in ‘MS. Bibl. Arch. Armachani,’ according to
Hardy; formerly MS. Clarendon 19, f. 32-44 (Bernard).
William of Ware, or William Warre, Guaro, Varro, &c., born at Ware in
Hertfordshire, entered the Order in his youth, according to William
Woodford[1376]. It is not improbable that he studied at Oxford, but there is
no authority for the statement[1377]. He was S.T.P. of Paris, where most of
his life was spent[1378]. He is said to have been a pupil of Alexander of
Hales[1379] (d. 1245), and master of Duns Scotus[1380], who went to Paris in
1304. He was called doctor fundatus by later writers[1381].
His Commentaries on the Sentences were seen by Leland in the Franciscan
Library, London[1382], and are now extant in the following MSS.:
Oxford:—Merton Coll. 103, 104 (sec. xiv). Inc. ‘Utrum finis per se et
proprius theologie.’

Toulouse, 242, § 1 (sec. xiv), anon. Inc. ut supra.
Troyes, 661, § 1 (xiv). ‘Questiones super I et III lib. Sentent.’ ascribed to
Duns Scotus. Inc. ut supra.
Troyes, 661 § 2 (xiv). ‘Questiones Wareti super tertium librum
Sententiarum.’ Inc. ‘Queritur utrum incarnacio sit possibilis Quod non.
Incarnacio est quedam.’
Vienna:—Bibl. Palat. 1424, and 1438 (xiv).
Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. xxxiii, Dext. Cod. i (sec.
xiii).

Padua, Bibl. S. Antonii, in Pluteis xxiv and xxii. (Tomasin, pp. 62a, 60b.)
Richard Middleton is said by Bale, Wood, and others, to have studied at
Oxford, but they produce no evidence for the statement[1383]. He was B.D.
at Paris in 1283[1384], when with other doctors and bachelors he was
appointed to examine the doctrines of Peter Johannis Olivi. He appears to
have incepted as D.D. soon afterwards[1385], and is reckoned among the
masters of Duns Scotus. Like many other famous doctors of his Order, he is
said by Wadding to have written on the Immaculate Conception[1386].
According to Willot he was known at Paris as Doctor solidus et copiosus,
fundatissimus et authoratus[1387]: at the Council of Basel he was referred to
as Doctor profundus[1388].
Commentum super iv. Sententiarum. Inc. prologus, ‘Abscondita produxit.’
MSS. Oxford:—Bodl. 2765 (now Bodley 744)—Balliol Coll. 198 (sec. xiv)
—Merton Coll. 98, f. 118 (sec. xiv).
Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 303—Pembroke Coll. 111, 113.
Canterbury:—Cathedral Lib. 4.
Munich:—Bibl. Regia, 3549 (sec. xv) and 8078 (sec. xiii-xiv).
Printed at Venice 1489, at Venice sine anno, and Venice 1507-9, &c.

Quaestiones quodlibetales (two parts). Inc. Pars I. ‘Queritur utrum Deus sit
summe simplex.’
MSS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 139, fol. 2 (sec. xiv).
Troyes, 142 (xiv); Pars II incipit ut supra.
Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. xvii, Sin. Cod. vi (sec. xiv
ineuntis).
Quodlibeta tria. (The first contains 22 questions; the second 31; the third
27.) Inc. ‘In nostra disputacione de quolibet.’
MSS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 139, f. 162 (sec. xiv).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14305 (sec. xiii) Questiones de quolibet; this may contain
either the Quodl. tria or the Questiones Quodlib., or both.
Toulouse, 738 (sec. xiii).
Florence:—Laurent. ut supra.
Printed at Venice 1509, Paris 1519, and Brescia 1591.
De gradibus formarum.
MS. Munich 8723, fol. 175 (sec. xiv and xv).
Quaestiones disputatae, by R. Middleton and others.
MS. Assisi (see Fratini, p. 203).
Sermo fratris Ricardi de dilatatione sermonum (?). Inc. ‘Quoniam
emulatores estis.’
MS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 249, f. 175 (sec. xiii).
William de la Mare, de Mara, or Lamarensis, may have studied at
Oxford[1389] before he went to Paris, where he was a disciple of
Bonaventura. In 1284 he published a criticism of Thomas Aquinas, called
Correctorium operum fratris Thomae[1390], which afterwards won for him
the title of standard-bearer of the Anti-Thomists[1391]. This treatise, which
may perhaps be still extant in an Italian library, is generally known only

through the reply to it, attributed sometimes to Aegidius Romanus, but with
more probability to Richard Clapwell[1392]. ‘The serious part of the work of
William de Lamarre,’ says M. Charles, ‘seems directly inspired by
Bacon[1393].’ He had no doubt come under Roger’s influence either at
Oxford or Paris. William de Mara appears also to have written in favour of
a strict observance of the Rule of St. Francis. In a dispute on the
interpretation of the Rule in 1310, Friar Ubertino de Casali, one of the
leaders of the ‘Spiritual’ party, quoted, in support of his views,
‘the opinion of St. Francis expressed in his Rule, and of Pope Nicholas in
his Declaration, of Friar Bonaventura in his Apologia, of Friars Alexander
and Rigaldus ... and of Friar John de Peckham in his book on Evangelical
Perfection, and of Friar William de Mara, who were all solemn masters of
our Order[1394].’
From this it is clear that William died before 1310.
Some of his writings are extant in MS.
Summa Fratris Gul. de Mara contra D. Thomam.
MS. Venice:—Bibl. S. Anton. in Pluteo xix (Tomasin).
Correctorium Fratris Gul. de Mera ... secundum dicta D. Thomae de
Aquino contra correctorium Fratris Joannis (?) de Crapuel Ordinis
Praedicatorum—perhaps the printed Defensorium seu Correctorium.
MS. ibid. in Pluteo xviii.
Quaestiones de natura virtutis, by ‘Gulielmus de le Maire, ordinis
Minorum.’
MS. Brit. Museum:—Burney 358 (sec. xiv)—mutilated at the beginning.
Sermo Fratris Guillermi de la Mare regentis in Theologia. (On St. Peter.)
Inc. ‘Precurrens ascendit in arborem sycomorum.... Fratres orate ut
sermo Dei currat et clarificetur.’
MS. Troyes, 1788 (sec. xiv).

Expositio libri Physicorum Aristotelis; and Comment. in libros 1, 2, et 3,
Sententiarum[1395].
MSS. Sta. Croce, Florence 380, 381, 382, 383; mentioned in Wadding, Sup.
ad Script. These MSS. are now in the Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis,
Plut. xxxiv. Sin. Codd. iv, v, vi, vii, but they do not seem to contain the
Physics.
Quaestiones tres philosophicae per Gulielmum (de Mara?) de Anglia,
fratrem ordinis Minorum. Inc. ‘Est dubitacio utrum lineam componam
ex punctis.’
MS. Bodl. Canon. Misc. 226, f. 76 (sec. xv). There seems no reason for
attributing these to W. de Mara rather than to William of Ockham, or
any English Minorite named William[1396].
John of Oxford, Friar Minor, was ordained priest by Peckham in
1284[1397].
Richard de Slekeburne (co. Durham), confessor of Devorguila, played an
important part in the foundation of Balliol College: this has already been
referred to[1398]. There is no direct proof that Friar Richard was himself at
Oxford. Several documents relating to him are preserved in the Balliol
College Archives, and described in the Reports of the Hist. MSS.
Commission[1399].
(1) A letter of Devorguila to him, in which she speaks of
‘the alms of the poor scholars of our House of Balliol now studying at
Oxford,’
and urges Friar Richard by all means in his power to promote the
perpetuation of the said house, a. d. 1284.
(2) A grant by the executors of Sir John Balliol of sums to the scholars, with
the consent of Devorguila and at the advice of Friar R. de Slekeburne (three
deeds, 1285-1286).
(3) A confirmation by Friar Richard of another grant by Sir J. Balliol’s
executors of debts due to Sir John: the confirmatory deed is dated Coventry,
1287.

William of Exeter was summoned in 1289 from Oxford by Deodatus,
Warden of the Friars Minors of Exeter[1400], to assist him in choosing a new
site for the convent[1401].
William of Leominster is placed among the Franciscans by Pits, but it is
not certain that he belonged to this Order[1402]. He was a friar and master of
Oxford in 1290; in this year his name appears as one of the masters who
gave their consent on behalf of the University to the compromise, effected
by the intervention of the King and his council, concerning the right of the
bishop of Lincoln to confirm the Chancellor-elect[1403]. Bale states that he
had seen this friar’s Collationes Sententiarum and Quaestiones Theologiae,
at London, ‘in quadam officina’[1404].
John Bekinkham appears to have been an Oxford Minorite; he was one of
the friars to whom the royal alms of 25 marks was paid by the exchequer in
1289 or 1290[1405].
John de Clara was executor of Hugh de Cantilupe, Archdeacon of
Gloucester, in 1285; he was at this time at Oxford[1406]. In 1289 or 1290 he
appears, in conjunction with John Bekinkham, as receiving the royal grant
of 25 marks in the name of the Oxford Convent[1407]. In 1299 he was
entrusted with 10 marks out of the royal exchequer for the expenses of
Hugh of Hertepol and William of Gainsborough, who were going to the
General Chapter at Lyons[1408]. In 1301 he was sent with instructions to find
the Provincial Minister with all speed, and received of the royal bounty 24s.
3d. for his expenses[1409].
John Russell was private chaplain to Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, in 1293.
In a letter to Raymund, General Minister of the Friars Minors, dated Aug.
29, 1293[1410], the Earl thanks the Minister
‘pro vestris muneribus preciosis, cultellis vestris videlicet nobilibus de
corallo atque insigni vase tiriaco, que in octavis virginis gloriose per manus
dilecti et domestici nostri fratris Johannis Rossel ... recepimus.... Dat’ in
manerio nostro de B. (Beckley?)[1411] prope Oxon’,’ &c.
Russell wrote about the same time to dominus R. de M. (Roger de
Merlawe):

‘Veni ad capitulum fratrum nostrorum Oxon’, proponens vos personaliter
visitasse; sed jam istud iter impedivit debilitas corporalis[1412].’
This John Russell was contemporary, and probably identical, with the
twenty-second master of the Franciscans at Cambridge[1413].
Postilla in Cantica Canticorum. Inc. ‘Cogitanti mihi Canticum.’
MS. London:—Lambeth Palace, 180, f. 1 (sec. xv).
Lectura super Apocalypsim. Inc. ‘Statuit septem piramides.... Accedens ad
expositionem.’
MS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 172, fol. 106 (sec. xiv), manu Will. de
Nottingham.
De potestate imperatoris et pape.
Formerly in the King’s Library, according to Bale (MS. Seld. supra 64, fol.
163b, 193): it is not mentioned in Casley’s Catalogue.
Henry de Sutton was warden of the Grey Friars, London, in 1302[1414], and
1307, when the King (Edward I) gave him 40 marks
‘pro pitancia fratrum Minorum in capitulo suo generali celebrando apud
Tolosam in festo Pentecost proximo[1415].’
He procured a legacy of 2 marks annually from Henry Waleys, Mayor of
London, for his convent[1416]. The evidence of his connexion with Oxford is
very slight. His name occurs as the author of a sermon in a collection of
sermons which were probably delivered at Oxford at the end of the
thirteenth century[1417].
William Mincy, William de Newport, Roger de Barton (Cheshire),
Robert de Gaddestyn or Gaddesby, John de Westburg, Robert de
Mogynton (Derby), Franciscans at Oxford in 1300, were on the 26th of
July in that year presented at Dorchester by Hugh of Hertepol the
Provincial, and licensed by Dalderby, Bishop of Lincoln, to hear
confessions, grant absolution, and enjoin penances, in the Archdeaconry of
Oxford. They were not at this time, and probably never became, doctors of
divinity[1418].

John de Stapleton, a. d. 1300, was similarly presented by the Provincial,
but rejected by the Bishop. The Register of the Friars Minors at London
says:
‘Friar John de Stapilton, heir to great wealth and lordship, spurning wife
and heritage, became a Friar Minor.’
It is doubtful whether this refers to the same person[1419].
Adam de Corf, Peter de Todworth, Walter Bosevile, and Roger de
Alnewyck, were in like manner presented by the Provincial and rejected by
the Bishop, a. d. 1300. They were not at this time D.D’s. Nothing further is
known of them, unless Roger de Alnewyck is to be identified with William
of Alnwick, 42nd reader at Oxford[1420].
John Duns Scotus[1421] was a Franciscan at Oxford in 1300. In the list of
friars presented to the Bishop of Lincoln he appears as ‘Johannes
Douns’[1422]; the Bishop refused to grant him license to hear confessions.
Soon afterwards Duns lectured on the four books of the Sentences as B.D.
at Oxford[1423]. At the end of 1304 he was called to Paris to incept as D.D.
The letter of the General Minister recommending this choice is given by
Wadding[1424], who however has misunderstood it. For this reason, and
because it illustrates some points in the educational system of the Minorites,
the letter may be quoted in full[1425].
In Christo sibi carissimis Patribus, Guillelmo Guardiano Parisiis, vel ejus
Vicario et Magistris, Frater Gondisalvus gaudens in Domino.
Ad expeditionem dilecti in Christo Patris Aegidii de Legnaco, de quo per
litteras vestras certificatus existo, cum de alio (ut moris est) eodem calculo
praesentando providere oporteat, et cum, secundum statuta Ordinis, et
secundum statuta vestri Conventus, Baccalaureus hujusmodi praesentandus
ad praesens debeat esse de aliqua provincia aliarum a Provincia Franciae,
dilectum in Christo Patrem Joannem Scotum, de cujus vita laudabili,
scientia excellenti, ingenioque subtilissimo, aliisque insignibus
conditionibus suis, partim experientia longa, partim fama, quae ubique
divulgata est, informatus sum ad plenum, dilectioni vestrae assigno, post
dictum patrem Aegidium, principaliter et ordinarie praesentandum. Injungo
nihilominus vobis ad meritum salutaris obedientiae, quatenus

praesentationem hujusmodi cum solemnitate solita sine multo dispendio
facere debeatis; si tamen constiterit vobis, quod dominus Cancellarius velit
duos simul licentiare de nostris, volo et placet mihi, quod frater Albertus
Methensis, si ad Conventum redire poterit, cum praefato fratre Joanne
debeat expediri. In quo casu mando et ordino, quod dictus frater Albertus
antiquitatis merito prius incipere debeat, dicto fratre Joanne sub eo
postmodum incepturo. Valete in Domino et orate pro me. Datum in loco
Esculi provinciae Marchiae Anconitanae, xiv Kal. Dec. anno mccciv.
Duns probably taught at Paris till 1307. Wadding, indeed, asserts that he
was sent to Cologne by the General Minister in 1305[1426]; but this is almost
impossible, and the description which Wadding gives of the scene is derived
from later and unhistorical tradition. The statement, however, that he was
appointed Regent by the friars in the General Chapter at Toulouse in 1307
sounds more plausible[1427]; he may have been made the first Regent at
Paris, or he may have been sent at this time as lector or Regent of the
Franciscan schools at Cologne. At any rate there seems no reason to distrust
the notice of his death which Wadding quotes from the list of friars who
died at Cologne[1428].
‘D. P. frater Joannes Scotus, sacrae Theologiae Professor, Doctor Subtilis
nominatus, quondam lector Coloniae, qui obiit anno mcccviii, vi Idus
Novembris.’
This entry, though certainly not contemporary, was probably derived from
some authentic record. Duns’ title of Doctor Subtilis, though it does not
seem to have been given him in his lifetime, is of considerable antiquity. It
is mentioned by Bartholomew of Pisa at the end of the fourteenth
century[1429], and by the MS. Catalogue at Assisi, written in 1381[1430].
A collected edition of his works was printed at Lyons in 1639. Many of the
works included in these twelve folio volumes are considered doubtful by
the editors[1431].
Some few treatises not included in this edition are assigned to him.
Johannis Scoti super Apocalypsin notulae. Inc. liber: ‘Liber iste
principaliter dividitur in tres partes.’ (Doubtful.)
MS. Bodl.:—Laud. Misc. 434, f. 1 (sec. xiv).

[Ejusdem?] super S. Matthaei Evangelium notae. Inc. ‘Liber generacionis,’
&c.: ‘Sicut fluvius de loco voluptatis egrediens.’ (Doubtful.)
MS. ibid. f. 75.
‘Utrum pluralitas formalitatum possit stare cum simplicitate divine
essencie.’
MS. Bodl.: Digby 54, f. 123 (sec. xv).
De perfectione statuum[1432]. Inc. ‘Quod status prelatorum sc. pastorum
ecclesie.’
MSS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 65, f. 119 (a. d. 1456).
Cambridge:—Public Library Dd. III. 47 (sec. xv); Corpus Christi Coll. 107,
fol. 77-93a (sec. xv).
Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. xxxvi, Dext. Cod. xii, p.
101 (sec. xiv exeuntis).
Opusculum Doctoris Subtilis super aliquos canones Arzachel. (Doubtful.)
MS. Cambridge:—Public Library 1017, f. 14-15 (sec. xv). Cf. Tanner, Bibl.
p. 689, sub ‘Stantonus.’
Tractatus Johannis Dons Scoti de lapide philosophorum. (Apocryphal.)
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14008, f. 156.
Robert Cowton, or de Couton (co. York), according to W. Woodford,
entered the Order when young[1433]. He was at Oxford in 1300, when the
Provincial asked the Bishop of Lincoln to license him, among others, to
hear confessions, but Robert was among the rejected[1434]. At this time he
was not a doctor. According to Bale and Pits he studied philosophy at
Oxford and theology at Paris: there can be little doubt that he obtained the
degree of D.D. in the latter University. His title of ‘the pleasant doctor[1435]’
is not vouched for by any early authority.
If we may draw any inference from the number of MSS. preserved, few
works by any Franciscan were more in demand in England[1436] in the

fourteenth and fifteenth centuries than the Commentaries of Robert Cowton
on the Sentences. The following MSS. contain them, or parts of them.
London:—Brit. Mus. Royal 11 B. i. 11 B. iv.—Gray’s Inn, 20.
Oxford:—Univ. Coll. 76, f. 455—Balliol 192, 199, 200, 201—Merton 91,
92, 93—New College 290—Exeter 43—Lincoln 36.
Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 281, 324—Peterhouse 73, 75—Pembroke 107.
Malachias of Ireland is said by Wadding to have been a Franciscan and
B.D. of Oxford, c. 1310. According to the same writer, he preached before
Edward II, and was not afraid to rebuke the King to his face[1437].
Libellus septem peccatorum mortalium, or, Tractatus de Veneno (often
wrongly ascribed to Grostete.)
MS. Brit. Mus.: Cott. Vitell. C. xiv, § 6.
Printed at Paris 1518.
Walter Brinkley or Brinkel (co. Cambridge), called by Willot ‘the Good
Doctor,’ ‘the ancient Doctor and Sophist[1438],’ is said by Bale to have been
a doctor of Oxford and to have flourished a. d. 1310. Bale and Pits give a
list of his works, but nothing of a trustworthy nature appears to be known
about him[1439].
John of Winchelsea, S.T.P. and Canon of Salisbury, a fellow of Merton in
the reigns of Henry III (?) and Edward I, entered the Minorite Order in his
old age at Salisbury, and died during the year of his noviciate, a. d.
1326[1440].
John Canon is said to have flourished c. 1320, and to have attended the
lectures of Duns Scotus at Oxford and Paris[1441]. Wood, referring to the
regestrum Oriell, says that his
‘philosophicall treatises were soe much esteemed among the students of this
University that they were read to them by their tutors and by logick
lecturers in each society[1442].’

Comment. in libros octo Physicorum Aristotelis. Inc. prol. ‘Venite ad me
omnes qui laboratis.’ Inc. opus. ‘Utrum substancia finita.’
Of the MSS. of the work, which are very numerous, the oldest appears to be
Lambeth MS. 100, f. 103, which Todd refers to the thirteenth century.
Printed at Padua 1475[1443], St. Albans 1481, Venice 1481, 1487, 1492, &c.
John Stanle, friar, was appointed to receive at the Exchequer the royal
grant of 25 marks payable at Easter 1323 to the Friars Minors at
Oxford[1444].
‘Philippus a Castellione Aretino’ (Castello near Arezzo) in the Tuscan
province, is described by Wadding as, ‘in theologia magister insignis apud
Oxonienses.’ He flourished 1316, and wrote treatises on the poverty of
Christ[1445].
William of Ockham, ‘Auctor nominalium,’ ‘Doctor singularis,’ ‘Doctor
invincibilis[1446],’ was born probably towards the end of the thirteenth
century. Whether he was a pupil of Duns Scotus is doubtful. He studied at
Oxford in the early years of the fourteenth century, and became B.D.
there[1447]. After this he was called to Paris, where he incepted as D.D. Here
he became acquainted with Marsiglio of Padua, over whom, according to
Pope Clement VI, he exercised a powerful influence[1448]. It is probable that
he was present at the famous Chapter of Perugia (1322), though he was not
(as is usually asserted) Provincial of England[1449]. From the first he took a
prominent part in the struggle against the Pope[1450]. He was imprisoned at
Avignon about the end of 1327, and a process was instituted against him in
the Curia
‘because of many erroneous and heretical opinions which he had
written[1451].’
He remained in custody for seventeen weeks, and refused to modify his
opinions. It is said that a ‘rich and noble lady,’ in admiring recognition of
his staunch defence of ‘Evangelical Poverty,’ gave him 70 florins[1452]. On
May 25, 1328, he fled from Avignon with Cesena, the General Minister, and
Bonagratia, joined the Emperor in Italy, and was excommunicated[1453]. In
Feb., 1330, he accompanied Louis to Bavaria, and lived henceforth for the
most part in the Franciscan Convent at Munich[1454]. His literary activity

was enormous, as may be seen from the list of his works. He took a direct
part in the affairs of state, being present at the Councils of Rense and
Frankfurt in 1338[1455]. From this time his writings, hitherto largely
theological, became more distinctly political[1456]. In spite of
excommunication, he continued to support the Emperor’s cause till Louis’
death in 1347, and even later[1457]. But now few only of the rebel friars
were left: Cesena died in 1342, Bonagratia in 1347; and in 1349 Ockham
sent back the seal of the Order to the orthodox General Minister, and
professed his desire to be reconciled to the Church[1458]. Clement VI
authorized the General Minister to absolve Ockham and his associates on
their confessing in set form their errors and heresies, and promising to obey
the Pope and his successors. Whether Ockham subscribed the papal
formula, nothing remains to show. The date of his death is uncertain; it may
however be concluded that he died at Munich not before 1349[1459].

Philosophical and Theological Works.
Commentarii in Porphyrii librum: in Aristotelis Praedicamentorum librum
(or De decem generibus): in Aristotelis de Interpretatione libros duo:
in libros Elenchorum.

MSS. Oxford:—Bodl. Canonic. Misc. 558, fol. 1, 24, 63b, 93 (sec. xiv).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14721.
Bruges 499, olim 59 (sec. xiii?).
The first three of these works (and perhaps the last) were printed at Bologna
in 1496, under the title Expositio aurea super totam artem Veterem.
In his Catalogue of the Bruges MSS., Haenel reads ethicorum instead of
elenchorum. Ockham seems to have written no distinct work on morals,
though another is attributed to him by a careless blunder. Caius College
MS. 200, § 3, contains, according to Smith’s catalogue, Correcciones
Occami (Occani in the old catalogue of 1697) in Oculum moralem. The
MS. really reads:

‘Correcciones octaui capituli de Ira. (Inc.) nisi tibi iratus fuissem. Refert
eciam Valerius. (Expl.) et ei reuelauit archana. Cum igitur sobrietas.’
In other words, it is merely a fragment of chapter viii. of the well-known
Oculus moralis attributed to Grostete or Peter de Limoges. See e.g. MS.
Bodl. Laud. Misc. 677, fol. 180 b, 2nd column.
Summa logices (ad Adamum): 3 parts. Inc. ‘Dudum me frater et amice....
Omnes logicae tractatores.’
MSS. London:—Brit. Mus., Arundel 367 (sec. xiv).
Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 464[1460]: ‘Logica Gul. de Occham in sex
tractatus divisa,’ viz. (1) de terminis, (2) de propositionibus, (3) de
Sillogismo simplici, (4) de S. demonstrativo, (5) de S. topico, (6) de S.
elenchorum, (written at Magdeburg, a. d. 1341): also Peterhouse 217.
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 6430, 6431, 6432 (sec. xiv); Bibl. Mazarine 3521 (sec.
xiv).
Laon 431 (sec. xiv).
Basel F ii. 25 (written at Oxford, a. d. 1342).
Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. xii. Sin. Cod. ii (sec. xiv),
six books.
Printed at Paris 1488, Venice 1522, Oxford 1675, &c.
Quaestiones in octo libros physicorum. Inc. ‘Valde reprehensibilis.’
MS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 293 (sec. xiv). Cf. Vienna:—Bibl. Palat. 5460
(sec. xv).
Printed at Rome 1637[1461].
In the Bibl. Nat. at Paris, MS. 17841 (sec. xv) contains Quest. Okam super
lib. Physic. et quotlibeta. The first leaf seems to have been misplaced;
inc., ‘(U)trum deus sit super omnia diligendus: quod non.’ The second
leaf begins: ‘Circa materiam de conceptu questio (?) utrum conceptus
sit aliquid fictum’: the questions on the physics end on fol. 26. They
appear to differ from the above[1462].

Questiones Ockam super phisicam et tractatus ejusdem de futuris
contingentibus.
MS. Bruges 469 (sec. xiv).
Summulae in libros physicorum (called by Leland, De introitu scientiarum):
4 parts. Inc. prol. ‘Studiosissime saepiusque rogatus.’ Inc. Pars. I.
‘Solent ante preambula indagare sapientes ante scientie ingressum de
ipsis scientiis.... Primo de ejus unitate.’
MS. Rodez, 56, p. 107 (sec. xv), ‘Philosophia naturalis.’
Printed at Venice 1506, and elsewhere.
Quaestiones (or Commentarii) in quatuor libros Sententiarum. Inc. ‘Circa
prologum primi libri Sententiarum quero primo utrum sit possibile
intellectui viatoris.’
MSS. Oxford:—Balliol Coll. 299, f. 7 (sec. xiv); Merton College 100 (sec.
xiv).
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 15561, f. 246 (sec. xv).
Basel A vi. 12.
Printed at Lyons 1495, &c.
Ockham’s commentary on the first book of the Sentences was probably
composed when he was B.D. of Oxford; it is longer than his commentaries
on the other three books together, and is often found separate.
MSS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 106 (sec. xiv).
Cambridge:—Caius Coll. 325.
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine 894 (sec. xiv), ‘de ordinacione fratris Guillelmi de
Okham de ordine fratrum Minorum Oxonie.’
Troyes 718 (sec. xiv).
Printed separately (at Strasburg) in 1483.

It is possible that the commentaries on the last three books exist in a fuller
form in the following MSS. than in the printed editions:—
MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 16398 (sec. xv), books 3 and 4; Cf. ibid. 16708, f.
253b (sec. xiv), ‘Circa tertium Sententiarum secundum Okkam.’
Munich:—Bibl. Reg. 8943 (sec. xv), books 2, 3, and 4.
Quodlibeta septem. Inc. quodl. i. qu. i. ‘Utrum possit probari per rationem
naturalem quod tantum unus sit deus: quod sic.’
MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 16398, f. 173 (sec. xv), and 17841, fol. 28 (sec.
xv): the latter ends abruptly near the beginning of the fourth quodlibet.
Venice:—Bibl. S. Anton. (Tomasin, p. 11 b).
Printed at Paris 1487, Argentina 1491.
At the end of the edition of 1491: ‘Expliciunt quotlibeta septem venerabilis
inceptoris magistri Wilhelmi de Ockam anglici, veritatum speculatoris
acerrimi, fratris ordinis minorum, post ejus lecturam Oxoniensem (super
sententias) edita.’
De motu, loco, tempore, relatione, praedestinatione et praescientia Dei, et
quodlibetum.
MS. Basel F ii. 24.

Cf. MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14715, f. 82b (sec. xiv); 14909, f. 102b; 14579, f.
345; 14580, f. 110b. Incipiunt: ‘Quia circa materiam de predestinatione
et prescientia sunt opiniones diverse.’
De successivis. Inc. ‘Videndum est de locis.’
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 16130, f. 121 (sec. xiv). Cf. MS. Bruges, 500.
Propositio an sit concedenda; essentia divina est quaternitas.
MS. Basel A vii. 13.
De sacramento altaris, and De corpore Christi: 2 treatises[1463]. Inc. i.
‘Circa conversionem panis.’ Inc. ii. ‘Stupenda super munera largitatis.’

MSS. Oxford:—Balliol Coll. 299, f. 196 (sec. xiv); Merton College 137
(sec. xiv).
Rouen, 561 (sec. xv).
Printed at Argentina 1491, at the end of the Quodlibeta; at Paris (1490?),
and Venice 1516.
Centiloquium theologicum. Inc. prol. ‘Anima nobis innata eo potius
naturaliter appetit cognoscere suum finem, quo pre ceteris appetentibus
omnibus corruptibilibus creatis ratione ditata ad ymaginem et
similitudinem dei celsius eminentiusque figuratur.’
Printed at Lyons 1495, at the end of the Sentences.
Quaestiones Ocham in terminabiles Alberti de Saxonia.
MS. Padua:—Bibl. S. Joannis in Viridario (Tomasin, p. 37).
Sermones Occham, by William or Nicholas of Ockham?
MS. Worcester:—Cathedral Library 74 quarto (= Bernard, Tom. II. 918).
Notes or disputations on theology and philosophy, to which the name
‘Okam’ is appended.
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 15888, f. 163, 174, 181.
Gul. Ocham quedam scripta.

MS. Venice:—Bibl. SS. Joannis et Pauli (Tomasin, p. 25b).

Political Works.
The dates are taken for the most part from Riezler.
Opus nonaginta dierum (written between 1330 and 1333). Inc. prol.
‘Doctoris gentium et Magistri Beati Pauli.’
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3387, fol. 1-163 b (sec. xv).

Printed at Louvain 1481, Lyons 1495, and in Goldast’s Monarchia, II. 993-
1236.
This treatise corresponds to Dialogus, Part III, Tract vi. de gestis fratris
Michaelis de Cesena (see below).
Epistola ad Fratres Minores in Capitulo apud Assisium congregatos, a. d.
1334. Inc. ‘Religiosis viris fratribus minoribus universis a. d.
Millesimo cccxxxiiii. in festo Petri apud Assisium congregatis frater
Guilhelmus de Ocham fidem defensare.’
MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3387, fol. 262 b-265 a (sec. xv).
This has not been printed and is not mentioned by Riezler; it is distinct from
the letter of Cesena to the Friars Minors about to assemble in Chapter at
Perpignan or Avignon, dated April 25, 1331 (printed Lyons 1495), and the
letter of Cesena to all the Friars Minors, dated Jan. 24, 1331 (printed ibid.;
Goldast, II. 1238, and Riezler, 248, give 1333 as the date of this last letter).
Dialogus[1464] inter magistrum et discipulum de Imperatorum et Pontificum
Potestate; 3 parts:
i. De fautoribus haereticorum libri septem (written a. d. 1342 or 1343). Inc.
‘In omnibus rebus curiosus existis.’
ii. De dogmatibus Johannis XXII, tractatus duo (a. d. 1333 or 1334). Inc.
‘Verba oris ejus iniquitas et dolus.’
iii. De gestis circa fidem altercantium, (a. d. 1342-3). (1) De potestate
papae et cleri; 4 books. (2) De potestate et juribus Romani imperii; 3 books.
Inc. ‘Discip. Salomonis utcumque sequendo vestigia.’
MSS. London:—Brit. Mus. Royal 7 F xii, §§ 1 and 2 (sec. xv), Parts I and
II; Harleian, 33 (sec. xv), Parts I and II; Addit. 33243 (sec. xv), Parts I
and II; also Lambeth Palace Library 168 (sec. xv), Parts II and III.
Oxford:—St. John’s College, 69 (sec. xv), Part I.
Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3657 (sec. xiv) Part I, fol. 1-208; Part II, fol. 289-321;
Part III, Tractatus ii, fol. 210-287, breaking off with the words nec
antedicte sedis scil. Romane antistitem in Lib. 3, cap. 16 of Tract. ii;

also 14313 (a. d. 1389), Parts I and II; 14619, fol. 121-166 (sec. xv),
Part III, Tractatus ii, breaking off in Lib. 3, cap. 16 of Tract. ii, as
above; 15881 (sec. xiv), Parts I, II; and Part III, Tractatus ii, breaking
off in Lib. 3, cap. 16, as above.—Bibl. de l’Arsenal 517, fol. 17-303,
Parts I, II, and III, ending with the words ‘Magister Hoc multis
racionibus improbatur. Primo ...’, in Chapter 17 of the 3rd book of
Tractatus ii of Part III[1465],—Bibl. Mazarine 3522 (sec. xiv), fol. 149-
198, Part III, Tract. ii, ending in Cap. 16 of Lib. 3; fol. 200-246, Part
III, Tract. i; fol. 246-297, Part III, Tract. ii, ending with Cap. 23 of Lib.
3, passibilis et mortalis.
Rome:—Vatican, Bibl. Regin. Sueciae, 90; cf. 79, ‘de potestate papae.’
(Montfaucon.)
Dijon 340 (sec. xv), Parts I, II, and III, ending with the words ‘pro nunc tibi
sufficiant,’ in the printed editions.
Auxerre 252, f. 88 (sec. xiv), containing Part III, Tract. ii (3 books).
Avignon 185, containing Part I.
Toulouse 221 (sec. xiv), Parts I, II, and Part III, Tractatus ii, which is called
Tractatus iii in the MS.
Basel A vi. 5, Parts I, II, and III.
Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut. xxxvi. Dext. Cod. xi (sec.
xiv), Parts I and II.
Venice:—St. Mark, Vol. I, Cl. viii. Cod. 7 (sec. xv), Part I, book 6.
Printed at Lyons 1495; reprinted in Goldast’s Monarchia II, 398-957.
Part III, according to the scheme drawn up in the Prologue[1466], was to
consist of nine treatises:
i. De potestate papae et cleri; ii. De potestate et juribus Romani Imperii; iii.
De gestis Johannis XXII; iv. De gestis Domini Ludovici de Bavaria; v. De
gestis Benedicti XII; vi. De gestis fratris Michaelis de Cesena; vii. De gestis
et doctrina fratris Geraldi Odonis; viii. De gestis fratris Guilhelmi de
Ockham; ix. De gestis aliorum Christianorum, regum, &c.

The edition of 1495, of which Goldast’s is a reprint, ends at the 23rd
chapter of the 3rd book of Treatise II, with the words:
‘passibilis et mortalis. Et haec de tertia parte Dialogorum pro nunc tibi
sufficiant.’
The last sentence Goldast surmises to be an addition of the editor,
Ascensius; but it occurs at the end of the Dijon MS., and both Goldast and
Riezler are probably mistaken in thinking that Ascensius had the whole
work before him and arbitrarily omitted Treatises III-IX[1467]. These were
probably never written. The Lambeth MS. (the only MS. in England which
contains Part III) and one version in the Mazarine MS. end with the words
‘passibilis et mortalis,’ like the printed editions, with the colophon (in
Lambeth MS.): ‘Dyalogorum venerabilis Guillermi Okam finis.’ The five
other MSS. in Paris, which contain Part III, leave out the last seven chapters
of the printed edition, and the Auxerre and Toulouse MSS. likewise do not
go beyond the third book of Treatise II. It is possible that the Vatican and
Basel MSS. may supply the remaining treatises; but this is unlikely. About
the year 1400, Peter d’Ailly, who must have had exceptionally good
opportunities for getting information[1468], wrote a summary of the
Dialogus[1469]. In this he omits Treatise I of Part III, and concludes with the
16th chapter of the third book of Treatise II (like the Parisian MSS.),
adding:
‘et non plus de hoc notabili opere potui reperire’[1470].
Several of Ockham’s other works correspond in substance to the projected
treatises of Part III; these will be noted in due course.
Defensorium (de paupertate Christi) contra Johannem XXII (written
between 1335 and 1349). Inc. ‘Universis Christi fidelibus.... Primus
error est quod Dominus noster.’
Printed at Venice 1513, and by Edw. Brown, Fascic. Rerum expetend. II,
439-464.
De imperatorum et pontificum potestate; 27 chapters or paragraphs. Inc.
prol. ‘Universis Christi fidelibus presentem tractatulum inspecturis,
frater Willelmus de Okkham.’ Inc. cap. i. ‘Si reges et principes
ecclesiarum.’

MS. Brit. Museum: Royal 10 A, xv (sec. xiv).
Tractatus adversus errores Johannis XXII, or Compendium errorum papae
(written between 1335 and 1338). Inc. ‘Secundum Bokkyg (?) super
sacram scripturam.’
MSS. London:—Lambeth 168, fol. 289-314 (sec. xv).
Paris:—Bibl. Mazarine 3522, fol. 298-310 (sec. xiv).
Printed at Louvain 1481, Lyons 1495, and in Goldast II, 957-976.
Cf. Dialogus, Part III, Tract. iii.
Opusculum adversus errores Johannis XXII. Inc. ‘Non invenit locum
penitencie Johannes XXII.... Ut pateat evidenter, quod retractatio quam
Johannes XXII fecisse refertur, ipsum ab hereticorum numero non
excludit.’

MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3387, fol. 175-213b (sec. xv).
Tractatus ostendens quod Benedictus Papa XII nonnullas Johannis XXII
haereses amplexus est et defendit; 7 books (written c. 1338). Inc. prol.
‘Ambulavit et ambulat insensanter non re sed nomine Benedictus XII
in viis patris sui Johannis vidz. XXII.’ Inc. lib. i, ‘Dogmatum
perversorum que Johannes XXII pertinaciter tenuit.’

MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3387, fol. 214b-262a (sec. xv).
Cf. Dialogus, Pars III, Tract. v.
Tractatus oquā (sic) de potestate imperiali. Inc. ‘Inferius describuntur
allegaciones per plures magistros in sacra pagina approbate per quas
ostenditur evidenter quod processus factus et sentencia lata in frankfort
per dominum lodowicum quartum dei gracia Romanorum
imperatorem.’ The decree of Louis referred to is dated Aug. 6,
1338[1471].
MS. Rome:—Bibl. Apostol. Vaticana, Codd. Palat. Latin. No. 679. Pars I,
fol. 117 (sec. xv).

Cf. Boehmer, Fontes rerum Germanicarum, Vol. IV, p. 592, ‘ex libro
Nicolai Minoritae de controversia paupertatis Christi 1324-1338.’ Inc.
‘Subsequenter ponuntur articuli et describunter de juribus imperii.’
Octo questiones super potestate ac dignitate papali, or De potestate
pontificum et imperatorum (written between 1339 and 1342). Inc.
‘Sanctum canibus nullatenus.’ Inc. quest. 1. ‘Primo igitur queritur
utrum potestas spiritualis et laicalis suprema.’
MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14603, fol. 147-216 (sec. xiv): ‘Explicit tractatus
venerabilis, theologi Guillelmi Okam de potestate pape.’—Bibl.
Mazarine, 3522, f. 104-148 (sec. xiv).
Cf. MS. Rome, Vatican, Bibl. Reg. Sueciae, 79, De potestate Papae; and
375, De potestate utriusque jurisdictionis.
De jurisdictione Imperatoris in causis matrimonialibus, a. d. 1342. Inc.
‘Divina providentia disponente.’
Printed at Heidelberg 1598; and in Goldast I, 21. It is of doubtful
authenticity; see Riezler, 254.
De electione Caroli IV (written 1347-9). Inc. ‘Quia sepe viri ignari.’
See Riezler, p. 271, 303, who refers to Höfler, Aus Avignon, 13.
The following treatises by Ockham are mentioned by Leland, Wadding, and
others, but have not been identified.
I. Philosophical.
De pluralitate formae, contra Sutton (Leland, Tanner).
De invisibilibus (Leland).
Tractatus incip.: ‘Dominus potest facere omne quod fieri vult non includit
contradictionem’:—
seen by Leland in the Franciscan Library, London (Collect. III, 49): Tanner
identifies it with Defensorium Logices. Perhaps it is the same as Dialectica
Nova: inc. ‘Contradictio in Deo non est.’ (Bale, Pits).

Comment. in Metaphysicam.
Tanner refers to MSS. Peterhouse 217 (where however no mention of it
occurs), and Caius Coll. K. 5 (?), perhaps a mistake for H. 5 = 464, which
contains Ockham’s logic.
Leland adds:
Vidi etiam tres libros Ochami, quorum primus De privatione, de materia
prima, de forma quae est principium, et De forma artificiali; secundus vero
De causis materiali, formali, efficiente, finali; tertius De mutatione subita
tractat.
[Cf. Quaestiones in lib. Physic?]
De perfectione specierum (Wadding). Inc. ‘Quia Magister.’
II. Political.
De paupertate Christi et Apostolorum (Tritheim, Wadding).
This is probably incorporated in the Dialogus (see Wadding, Ann. Min.
VIII, 81-2). Cf. MS. Florence:—Laurentiana, ex Bibl. S. Crucis, Plut.
xxxi. Sin. Cod. iii (sec. xiv).
De actibus hierarchicis, lib. i (Wadding).
Wadding, Sup.: ‘citat Joan. Picus Mirandulanus in sua Apologia quaest. 1.’
Errorum quos affinxit papae Johanni, lib. i (Wadding). Inc. ‘Locuti
adversum me lingua.’
(Probably identical with one of the extant treatises.)
Defensorium (against the pope); mentioned by Leland, Bale, &c. Inc.
‘Omni quippe regno desiderabilis.’
This is the Defensor pacis of Marsilius of Padua.
Note.—In his catalogue of Vatican MSS., Montfaucon mentions, among
Praecipui codices MSS. Bibliothecae Vaticanae, ‘947, ad 956 Guill.
Occhami opera.’ See Montfaucon, Bibl. Bibliothecarum MSS. p. 100.

Henry de Costesey or Cossey (Norfolk) is reckoned among the Oxford
Franciscans by Bale and others, but without evidence. He was forty-sixth
Master of the Minorites at Cambridge (c. 1336)[1472], and is said to have
died at Babwell[1473].
Commentarius super Apocalypsim. Inc. ‘Apocalypsis Jhesu Christi quam....
Dividitur enim iste liber sicut alii libri in prohemium et tractatum.’
MSS. Bodl.: 2004 = . B. 3. 18, now Bodley 57. Laud. Misc. 85, fol. 67 b
(sec. xiv).
Cambridge:—Pembroke Coll. 175.
Comment. super Psalterium. Inc. ‘Aperiam in psalterio.’
MS. formerly in the Franciscan library, London[1474]: quoted in MS. Bodl.
Laud. Misc. 213, f. 192 (sec. xv).
John de Hentham was a Minorite in the Oxford Convent in 1340, when he
acted as attorney for the warden[1475].
Hugh de Willoughby or Wylluby, S.T.P., was the Chancellor of the
University in 1334. He held the prebend of Barnby, in the diocese of York,
in 1338. It is not known when he became a Franciscan; but it was no doubt
in his declining years[1476].
Peter de Gaieta was elected in the General Chapter at Assisi, c. 1340, to
take the degree of B.D. and lecture on the Sentences at Oxford. When the
appointment of a friar to read the Sentences at Paris was discussed in the
General Chapter at Marseilles in 1343, Peter obtained many votes. In the
same year the degree of Master in the University of Naples was conferred
on him by the command of Pope Clement VI. He had previously lectured on
the Sentences there, and been Minister of the Provinces of Apulia and Terra
Laboris[1477].
John Lathbury (Bucks), said to have been a native of the Reading
friary[1478], was D.D. of Oxford and flourished about the middle of the
fourteenth century[1479]. The evidence for the date is found in his own most
famous work[1480]; the passage may be quoted as an authentic specimen of a
subject of conversation between two Oxford Franciscans:

‘Item anno domini 1343 in capitulo provinciali Londoniis celebrato, et in
Oxonia plurimis vicibus prius et post in studio secum commoranti, frater
Hermanus de Colonia fratri Johanni de Latthebury retulit viva voce, quod in
patria sua est quedam villa que vulgariter dicatur Enger, de qua Anglia
vocaliter derivatur, et prope illam villam ad distanciam unius miliarii est
quedam quercus, arbor ingens et antiqua, ad quam ipse cum esset puerulus
ex more patrie cum reliquis concurrebat. Nam omni nocte nativitatis
Christi, quasi nocte media, quercus illa glandes grandes et perfectas subita
apparicione ex se profert et producit copiose. Unde et incole illius patrie
annuatim illa nocte ad illum locum turmatim ex consuetudine concurrunt, et
ibi cum luminibus et lanternis vigilantes, horam solitam expectant et
explorant, bibentes, edentes, ludentes et noctem insompnem ducentes,
habentes secum lapides, baculos et saculos pro fructu arboris excuciendo et
asportando.’
There appear to have been two contemporary Minorites of the same name
and family. Bale, after mentioning the commentaries of John Ridevaus on
the letter of Valerius to Rufinus and the mythologies of Fulgentius,
adds[1481]:
‘Hos libros cum multis aliis Joannes Lathbury senior contulit juniori Joanni
Lathbury a. d. 1348. Ex cenobio Minorum Radinge.’
The elder died at Reading at an advanced age in 1362, the younger at
Northampton in 1375[1482]. It is not clear which of the two was the author.
The best known work of John Lathbury is his Commentary on
Lamentations, or Liber moralium in Threnos Hieremiae, or Lectura super
librum Threnorum. Inc. ‘Juxta mores modernorum.’
MSS. Oxford:—Merton Coll. 189—Exeter Coll. 27, &c.
Printed at Oxford in 1482, being one of the first books issued by the Oxford
press.
Distinctionum liber theologicarum, or Alphabetum morale. Inc.
‘Abstinendum est a carnalibus delitiis.’
MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 11 A xiii (sec. xv).

Oxford:—Exeter Coll. 26 (sec. xv), with the note ‘Johannes Latbury, doctor
de ordine fratrum minorum, qui fecit lecturam super librum Trenorum,
compilavit istum tractatum.’
Cambridge:—Peterhouse 96.
De luxuria clericorum.
Extracts from this treatise of Lathbury’s are in MS. Bodl. James 19 (Cf.
Bernard’s Catal. I, 260 b), from MSS. in Exeter College: the treatise
itself seems to be extracted from the Distinctiones.
De timore et amore Domini, &c., secundum Johannem Lathbury, Thomam
de Alquino ... aliosque.
MS. Oxford:—Magd. Coll. 93 (a. d. 1438); perhaps merely excerpts from
some other work.
Super Acta Apostolorum. Inc. ‘Superedificati estis supra fundamentum
apostolorum.’
Mentioned by Bale (MS. Seld. sup. 64, fol. 89) ‘ex musaeo Rob. Talbot.’
Hermann of Cologne was a contemporary and friend of John Lathbury at
Oxford, c. 1343[1483]. It is impossible to identify him with any of the other
Hermanns who belonged to the Minorite Order at this time: e.g. Hermann
of Saxony, the lawyer (fl. 1337), or Hermann Gygas, the historian[1484].
Robert (or John?) Lamborne,
‘the son of a baron, and the last heir of that barony, entered the Order in
London[1485].’
He became confessor to Queen Isabella in 1327[1486], and he still occupied
this office, ‘though he was so attenuated that he was almost or quite blind,’
in 1343, when Clement VI granted him certain privileges[1487]. It is
however very doubtful whether he was ever at Oxford. The name occurs in
the Old Catalogue of Fellows of Merton College, under the reign of Edward
III. If the two are identical, Lamborne ought to be placed in the Catalogue
under Edward II, as he was clearly a friar in 1327; but there is no good
reason for assuming their identity: Robert Lamborn of Merton may be a

mistake for Reginald Lamborn[1488]. Friar John (?) Lamborne, confessor to
Queen Isabella, was buried in the choir of the Grey Friars Church,
London[1489].
Reginald Lambourne was B.D. of Merton College (c. 1350-1360), where
he was a pupil of the famous mathematicians, William Rede and John
Ashendon[1490]. He then entered the Benedictine Order, was at Eynsham
Abbey in 1363/4 and 1367, and incepted D.D. as a monk[1491]. He
afterwards took the Franciscan habit at Oxford, and died at
Northampton[1492].
Epistola a Reginaldo Lambourne, monacho simplici Eynshamensi, ad
quendam Johannem London, de significatione eclipsium lunae ‘hoc
anno instante, 1363.’
Epistola a Reginaldo Lambourne monacho Eynshamensi [ad. Gul. Rede ut
videtur] ao 1367, de conjunctionibus Saturni Jovis et Martis cum
prognosticatione malorum inde in annis 1368-1374 probabiliter
occurrentium.
MS. Bodl.:—Digby 176, fol. 50, and 40 (sec. xiv).
Robert Eliphat flourished in the middle of the fourteenth century; he is
placed among the Masters of the English Province by Bartholomew of
Pisa[1493]. Pits states that he was famous at Oxford and Paris[1494]. There
can be little doubt that he is identical with Robert Alifax or Halifax, the
fifty-sixth Master of the Franciscans at Cambridge[1495].
Robertus Haliphax de sententiarum libris I et II.
MS. Assisi 161 (sec. xiv).
Primus Eliphat super sententias.
MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14514 (sec. xiv).
Vienna:—Bibl. Palat. 1511, f. 110-120 (sec. xiv).
Quaestiones Rob. Eliphat.

MSS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 14576 (xiv), 15561, f. 243 (xv), 15880 (xiv),
15888, f. 181, (xiv)[1496].
Gilbert Peckham, fellow of Merton in 1324 and 1339, may be identical
with the fifty-ninth Master of the Minorites at Cambridge[1497].
William Tithemersch (co. Northampton), ‘of the custody of Oxford,’ was
sixty-first Master of the Minorites at Cambridge, and twenty-first
Provincial, about 1350; he was succeeded by Roger Conway, and was
buried at Bedford[1498].
William Scharshille (co. Stafford),
‘formerly a justiciary under Edward III, gave away all his temporal goods
and entered the Order, with great honour, at Oxford[1499].’
The date is not specified. A William de Shareshull, who is no doubt the
same person, was ordered to attend a parliament in Scotland for the
confirmation of a treaty between Edward III and Edward Balliol, in 1333;
he is mentioned as a justice of assize in 1337, and he was appointed one of
the examiners of some ecclesiastical petitions to Parliament in 1351[1500]. In
1356 ‘Dominus Willhelmus de Scharshull’ appears among the witnesses to
an indenture between the University of Oxford and Richard d’Amory[1501].
Richard Lymynster and Giuliortus de Limosano are mentioned in a
University decree as ‘wax-doctors’ of the Mendicant Orders at Oxford in
1358. It is uncertain to which Order the former belonged. The latter was a
Minorite from Sicily, who tried to obtain the degree of B.D. by means of
letters from the king of England[1502].
Jerome of St. Mark is said to have been a Minorite and Bachelor of
Oxford, and author of a treatise on logic. His date—or even the century in
which he lived—is unknown[1503].
John of Nottingham was a member of the Oxford Convent in the middle of
the fourteenth century: he was one of the witnesses to the will of Robert de
Trenge, Warden of Merton, and perhaps his confessor; the will was
executed 1351, and proved 1357[1504].

Roger Conway, of the convent of Worcester and D.D. of Oxford, in 1355
obtained papal license to live in the Franciscan Convent of London
‘for the spiritual recreation of himself and of the nobles of England,’
who were said to flock in great numbers to this friary; Roger was to be
subject to the rules of the house like any other friar[1505]. In 1357 he came
forward as the champion of the Mendicant Orders against the Archbishop of
Armagh, and wrote and preached in London ‘on the poverty of Christ’ and
the right of the friars to hear confessions[1506]. According to one account
‘he strenuously defended his Order in the Curia against Armachanus[1507].’
In 1359 Innocent VI issued a bull confirming the decree Vas electionis of
John XXII,
‘at the instance of Roger Coneway of the Order of Friars Minors, who
asserts that he needs these letters on behalf of the said Order[1508].’
He was twenty-second Provincial Minister of England[1509], and perhaps
held the office at the time of the controversy with Richard Fitzralph[1510].
Bale and Pits state that he died in 1360; it is not improbable that he lived
several years longer. He was buried in the choir of the Grey Friars Church,
London[1511].
A book formerly belonging to Roger Conway is preserved among the MSS.
of Gray’s Inn; Codex 1, formerly 17 (= 1584 in Bernard)—
‘Joannes Cassianus de Institutis Egyptiorum Coenobiorum. Cui haec notula
apponitur: “Iste est liber Fratris Rogeri de Coneway[1512]”.’
Defensio Religionis Mendicantium, against Armachanus, or De
confessionibus per regulares audiendis contra informationes
Armachani; known also by the opening words of the treatise (preface):
‘Confessio et pulchritudo.’
MSS. Oxford:—Bodl. sup. A I, art. 95; also Corpus Christi Coll. 182, fol.
37 (sec. xv).
Cambridge:—Public Library Ii. iv. 5. fol. 15 (sec. xv); also Corpus Christi
Coll. 333 (sec. xv).

Paris:—Bibl. Nationale 3221, fol. 206-46 (see. xv); and 3222, fol. 117,
under the title: ‘Quedam informacio contra intentionem domini Ricardi
Archiepiscopi Armachani super decretali Vas electionis, edita a ffratre
Rogero Conewey magistro in Theologia de ordine fratrum minorum.’
Vienna:—Bibl. Palat. 4127, f. 221 (sec. xv).
Printed at Lyons 1496; Paris 1511 (among the works of Armachanus); and
in Goldast, Monarchia II, p. 1410, (under the name ‘Chonoe’).
Intellectus fratrum de constitutione Vas electionis quo ad Negativam ibidem
definitam. Inc. ‘Verumptamen quia iste dominus Reverendus dicit
quod intellectus fratrum est erroneus.’

MS. Paris:—Bibl. Nat. 3222, fol. 133b-158b: it is anonymous in this MS.,
but is attributed to Roger Conway by Bale, MS. Seld. sup. 64, fol.
157b, and Tanner, Bibl. 197. The same MS. contains the Replicationes
of Armachanus against this work, ff. 159 sqq.
Quaestiones tres de Christi paupertate et dominio temporali. Inc. ‘Questio
est hic de mendicitate;’ or ‘Utrum Christus hominum perfectissimus.’
MS. Vienna:—Bibl. Palat. 4127, f. 249-269 (sec. xv).
Wadding (Script. p. 212) gives the second incipit and says: ‘Habeo MSS.’
These may be now in some Italian library; perhaps in the Franciscan
Convent at Rome, or MS. Vatican 3740, ‘Tractatus diversorum super
quaestione de paupertate Christi et Apostolorum’ (Montfaucon, p.
110).
Simon Tunstede, de Tunstude, or Donstede, is said by Bale to have
entered the Order at Norwich, where, according to Blomefield, he
afterwards became Warden of the Franciscan Convent[1513]. He was Regent
Master of the Friars Minors at Oxford in 1351[1514], and according to
contemporary evidence was ‘skilled in music and in the seven liberal
arts[1515].’ He wrote on the Meteorics of Aristotle[1516], and made some
alterations in the horologe called Albion, invented in 1326 by Richard of
Wallingford, Abbat of St. Albans, and in the book which the Abbat wrote
about his invention[1517]. He became twenty-third Provincial Minister in
succession to Roger Conway about 1360[1518]. He was buried among the