No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 February 2016
The only records to survive from the annual Lenten distribution of books in English Benedictine abbeys are four years' notes from Thorney abbey. Although not from consecutive years, all date from the period 1324 to 1330, during the early part of the abbacy of Reynold of Water Newton (1323–47). In the last years of his tenure the monks of Thorney were found to be reading material of a less pious character: two visitations discovered that a scandalous book was circulating among them during the years 1345 to 1347. Like the survival of the Lenten distribution records, this story is unique among English monastic archives. These sources provide two distinct, yet complementary, glimpses of the reading culture at Thorney in the time of Abbot Reynold, which are discussed in turn below.
1 I am grateful to those friends who have read over this paper for me. Dr. Bruce Barker-Benfield checked my reading of the distribution lists using the videospectral comparator. Dr. Joan Greatrex and Miss Barbara Harvey shared their unrivaled knowledge of English Benedictine records.Google Scholar
2 Regula S. Benedicti , 48.14–16 (ed. Hanslik, R., CSEL 75, 2nd ed. [Vienna, 1977], 117). This requires monks to spend some time reading each day during Lent, “in quibus diebus quadragesimae accipiant omnes singulos codices de bibliotheca, quos per ordinem ex integro legant; qui codices in caput quadragesimae dandi sunt.” This distribution was referred to by different words in different houses; electio, ostensio, and demonstratio are all used by English Benedictine abbeys.Google Scholar
3 Other borrowing records are not in the same category. Examples include the secondary record of twelve books on loan to a monk, “Nomina librorum pro quibus scribor in tabula,” from St. Augustine's abbey, Canterbury (ed. James, M. R., Ancient Libraries of Canterbury and Dover [Cambridge, 1903], 502–3); or the list of monks and the many books each had borrowed from St. Albans, datable 1420 × 1437 (English Benedictine Libraries [see next note], 554–63 [B87]); or other records of loans both internal and external (ibid., 32, 128–30 [B27], 153–54 [B33], 534–37 [B83], 593 [B95]). From Continental Benedictine sources, there are several borrowing lists known (Theodor Gottlieb, Über mittelalterliche Bibliotheken [Leipzig, 1890], no. 211 [books on loan from Weissenburg, ca. 900], no. 400 [catalogue, 1276, from Saint-Pons, includes some reference to books on loan], no. 392 [list of books loaned by Saint-Ouen in Rouen, 1372–73]). Dr. Giovanni Fiesoli, editor of the ongoing Repertorio di inventari e cataloghi di biblioteche medievali, Occidente latino, secoli VIII–XV, adds reference to a loan-list from Casole, saec. xii–xiii (ed. Omont, H., “Le Typicon de Saint-Nicolas-de-Casole,” Revue des études grecques 3 [1890]: 89–90).Google Scholar
4 In a valuable discussion of the Lenten election, Christ, Karl, “In caput Quadragesimae,” Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen 60 (1943): 33–59, notes that custumals use the word breue for the precentor's record but observes, “Keines dieser Breven ist in der ursprünglichen Form erhalten” (44). He mentions two lists from Cluny. A single-sheet record made by the secretarius in 1252 is now BNF MS nouv. acq. lat. 2265, no. 25, printed by Leopold Delisle, Inventaire des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale: Fonds de Cluni (Paris, 1884), 373–77, which records in a single list 117 monks and the books on loan to them as well as a further eleven books not returned. An even earlier list of books taken by sixty-four monks in an unknown year around the middle of the eleventh century was included in the custumal of Cluny that has been preserved at Farfa; the text is accessible in Liber tramitis, § 190 (ed. Dinter, P., Corpus consuetudinum monasticarum 10 [1980], 261–64), or reprinted from a 1726 edition in PL 150:1284–85; this list was reprinted with notes on the books, including comparisons with the twelfth-century Cluny library catalogue, and on the monks, including their appearance as witnesses in charters, by Wilmart, Andre, “Le couvent et la bibliothèque de Cluny vers le milieu du XIe siècle,” Revue Mabillon 11 (1921): 89–124.Google Scholar
5 The texts were first published by Humphreys, K. W., “Book Distribution Lists from Thorney Abbey, Cambridgeshire, 1324–30,” Bodleian Library Record 2 (1941–49): 205–10, and again by Sharpe, R., Carley, J. P., Thomson, R. M., and Watson, A. G., English Bene dictine Libraries: The Shorter Catalogues, Corpus of British Medieval Library Catalogues 4 (London, 1996), 598–605 (B100).Google Scholar
6 Published in facsimile, The Tanner Bede , ed. Bately, J. M., Early English Manuscripts in Facsimile 24 (Copenhagen, 1992). The book has been tentatively assigned a Thorney provenance on the evidence of the endleaf, though this shows only that it was there in the fourteenth century, not in the tenth (Ker, N. R., Medieval Libraries of Great Britain, 2nd ed. [London, 1964], 189).Google Scholar
7 The Peterborough custumals (Lambeth Palace Library, MSS 198, 198b) have not been printed in their entirety; they are discussed by Gransden, A., “The Peterborough Custom ary and Gilbert of Stanford,” Revue Benedictine 70 (1960): 625–38. The relevant passages are printed by Friis-Jensen, K. and Willoughby, J. M. W., Peterborough Abbey, Corpus of British Medieval Library Catalogues 8 (London, 2001), xliii–xlvi, and discussed, xxviii–xxix. It is frustrating that, after describing in such detail the handing in of books, the custumal says nothing about how they were redistributed.Google Scholar
8 Some surviving books from Peterborough contain donors' names expressed simply in the genitive. The best known example is marked “Gesta regis. H. secundi Benedicti abbatis” (one of the books given by Abbot Benedict, BP3. 42; now BL MS Cotton Julius A. xi [s. xii]); the inscription induced Thomas Hearne to misattribute the work, Boger of Howden's Gesta Henrici II, to Abbot Benedict. Other examples are two psalters marked “Psalterium abbatis Roberti de Lindseye glosatum” (BP4. 4; now Cambridge, St. John's College, MS 81 [s. xii/xiii]) and “Psalterium Roberti de Lindeseye abbatis” (BP4. 6; now London, Society of Antiquaries, MS 59 [s. xiiiin]). Further surviving examples cannot be matched with either the records of donations by abbots or with the later-fourteenth-century catalogue: these are another psalter marked “Psalterium fratris Hugonis de Stiuecle prioris” (now Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 53 [s. xiv]), an antiphonal (now Cambridge, Magdalene College, MS 10 [s. xivin]), and compare Walter of Whittlesey's own chronicle, inscribed “Iste liber fuit quondam fratris Walteri de Wytlese” (now BL MS Add. 39758 [s. xiv1]). No book marked in this way can be matched with an entry in the late-fourteenth-century catalogue, suggesting that this sort of donor-marking was abandoned by the middle of the fourteenth century.Google Scholar
9 Deeping St. James lies about eight miles WNW from Thorney as the crow might fly over the fen; a monk would have to take the road through Crowland to cross the fen and the river Welland.Google Scholar
10 Aberth, John, Criminal Churchmen in the Age of Edward III: The Case of Bishop Thomas de Lisle (University Park PA, 1996), 27–41.Google Scholar
11 David, M. Smith, and London, Vera C. M., The Heads of Religious Houses: England and Wales, vol. 2, 1216–1377 (Cambridge, 2001), 75.Google Scholar
12 License was authorized by the regent and issued under the seal of absence at Reading, 17 April 1347 ( Calendar of the Patent Rolls 1345–1348 [London, 1903], 268; copy in Cambridge University Library MS 3021, fol. 471v). Warranted “by letter of the Keeper,” that is the infant Prince Lionel, custos Angliae, license may have been effectively authorized by the chancellor, John Offord, or by Simon Islip, a member of the regency council who had custody of the Keeper's own seal. (King Edward III was in France at the time and his seals were working in a Chancery set up at Calais; on the regency administration in England, see Tout, T. F., Chapters in the Administrative History of England, 6 vols. [Manchester, 1920–33], 3:164–66, 223; 5:21–25.) The election of the new abbot took place at Thorney on 27 April, and at Reading on 30 April the regent authorized letters patent notifying the bishop of Ely of the royal assent to the choice of William de Haddon (Calendar of the Patent Rolls 1345–1348, 280), further evidence of the speed with which the abbey communicated with government. Meanwhile, during the vacancy at Thorney, the king's escheator in Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire had taken charge of the temporalities of the abbey; these were released to William de Haddon under a mandate of 22 May (ibid., 294). In return the abbey was required to provide a pension for one of the king's clerks (Calendar of the Close Rolls 1346–1349 [London, 1905], 363).Google Scholar
13 The report of the election was included in the bishop's register, now deposited in Cambridge University Library, MS EDR G/l/1, pt. 2, fols. 49r–50r. From here it was transcribed by the Cambridgeshire antiquary, William Cole (1714–1782), in 1752, Cole MS 23, now BL MS Add. 5824, pp. 164–66 (now fol. 165r, 166r, 167r, according to British Library rules; Cole himself initially used only the recto, but he used the versos to copy other material in 1769).Google Scholar
14 The Red Book of Thorney, now Cambridge University Library, MS Add. 3020–3021 (s. xiv), fols. 471v–472v. This is the only surviving cartulary (though we know of the existence of others, known as the Black Book and the Green Book). Robert of Corby subsequently petitioned the pope, claiming that he had been elected abbot and had resigned for the sake of peace; in 1351 he was compensated with two monks' portions, suitable lodgings within the abbey, and a pension of eight marks per year (Bliss, W. H., Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Petitions to the Pope, vol. 1, AD 1342–1419 [London, 1896], 219; Smith, and London, , The Heads of Religious Houses 2: 75–76).Google Scholar
15 “Vir literatus in iure peritus in uniuersitate Cantabrig' in decretis baccallarius et in uniuersitate Oxon' eiusdem iuris professor effectus et approbatus” (fol. 472r); he does not appear in Emden's biographical register for either university (see Table 2, note on line 41).Google Scholar
16 Smith, David M., Guide to Bishops' Registers of England and Wales: A Survey from the Middle Ages to the Abolition of Episcopacy in 1646 (London, 1981), 67.Google Scholar
17 Cambridge University Library MS EDR G/l/1, pt. 1, fols. 97r–119v (1337–45); pt. 2, fols. 91r–101r (1346–56).Google Scholar
18 Sharpe, et al. , English Benedictine Libraries (n. 5 above), 606–8 (B102).Google Scholar
19 “Hugucio de dono fratris Iohannis Tiryngham” (B102. 11), “Brito de dono fratris Iohannis Tiryngham” (B102. 13).Google Scholar
20 Salzmann, L. F., VCH Cambridgeshire , vol. 2 (London, 1948), 214.Google Scholar
21 It is common to find that, in noting the contents of a book on a flyleaf, the precentor adopts a formula that gives precedence to one work, with a phrase such as “in quo continentur” to introduce the remaining contents; this pattern is also found in medieval library catalogues. It is usually though not invariably the first work that is chosen to represent the volume as a whole.Google Scholar
22 Humphreys, , “Book Distribution Lists” (n. 5 above), 206.Google Scholar
23 The Abingdon custumal (1189), edited from BL MS Cotton Claudius B. vI (s. xiii2), fols. 183r–207v, by Stevenson, Joseph, Rolls Series 2 (1858), 2:336–417 (at pp. 373–74).Google Scholar
24 The Eynsham custumal, edited from Bodl. MS Bodley 435 (SC 2374) (s. xiv1), fols. 3r–131r, by Gransden, Antonia, Corpus consuetudinum monasticarum 2 (Siegburg, 1963), 166.Google Scholar
25 Salzmann's comments (VCH Cambs., 2: 215), based on these lists and the few surviving books, include some notable errors. He mentions a work of Anselm and “the inevitable Sentences of Peter Lombard,” neither of which are supported by evidence, and he interpreted Ker's reference to “Beda &c.” in Oxford, St. John's College, MS 17, as a copy of the Historia ecclesiastica; the book contains Bede's De temporum ratione with other computistical material; the twelfth-century and later Thorney annals were removed from the manuscript and are now BL MS Cotton Nero C. vii, fols. 80–84. Dr. David Rundle tells me that this manuscript was given to Duke Humfrey of Gloucester by the abbot of Thorney in 1431, as appears from an inscription at fol. 177v. I wonder whether it may be identified with the item in the fourteenth-century Deeping book list, “Liber de compoto cum aliis compilacionibus” (B102. 12).Google Scholar
26 Registrum Angliae , ed. Rouse, R. H. and Rouse, M. A., Corpus of British Medieval Library Catalogues 2 (London, 1991), 274; de Kirkestede, Henry, Catalogus de libris autenticis et apocrifis , ed. Rouse, R. H. and Rouse, M. A., Corpus of British Medieval Library Catalogues 11 (London, 2004), 552.Google Scholar
27 Ker, , Medieval Libraries of Great Britain (n. 6 above), 189. The number of items does not easily square with the number of physical volumes in the thirteenth century.Google Scholar
28 An inscription identifies the writer as Br. John Brito (fol. 29r), who is described as precentor of Thorney in a receipt entered at fol. 105r, which includes a date in 1292. A document of 1307 is also included (fol. 177v).Google Scholar
29 There is an edition of the text by von Jagow, Gebhard, “Die naturphilosophischen, ausführlich kommentierten Aphorismen des Magister Urso Calabrien” (diss. Leipzig, 1924). Two fragmentary copies survive of a catalogue of the library at Ramsey, both of them printed with notes by Sharpe, et al., English Benedictine Libraries (n. 5 above), 330–50 (B67, two leaves remaining from a booklet), 350–415 (B68, five membranes remaining from a roll).Google Scholar
31 The union-reference 63 for Crowland occurs against 110 titles in Registrum Angliae; references collected by Rouse, and Rouse, , Registrum Anglie , 274–75. There is a considerable measure of correlation between this and the list of titles entered at the back of a book from Crowland, printed with notes by Sharpe, et al., English Benedictine Libraries, 113–25 (B24); illustrated by Rouse and Rouse, Registrum Anglie, cxlix.Google Scholar
32 Friis-Jensen, and Willoughby, , Peterborough Abbey , 49–177 (BP21).Google Scholar
33 These abbreviations are used: Google Scholar BHL = Bibliotheca hagiographica latina Google Scholar CPG = Clavis patrum graecorum Google Scholar CPL = Clavis patrum latinorum Google Scholar
34 Salzman, L. F. in VCH Cambs , 2:215; Sharpe, et al., English Benedictine Libraries, 598.Google Scholar
35 EDR G/1/1, pt. 2, fol. 47r; part transcript, part summary, by the Cambridgeshire antiquary William Cole (1714–1782), in BL MS Add. 5824, pp. 161–62; quoted in part by Aberth, 28 n., and by Sharpe, et al., English Benedictine Libraries , 598.Google Scholar
36 EDR G/1/1, pt. 2, fol. 48r–v; transcribed by William Cole, BL MS Add. 5824, pp. 96–97; quoted in part by Aberth, 30 n., and Sharpe, et al., English Benedictine Libraries , 598.Google Scholar
37 VCH Cambs , 2:215.Google Scholar
38 Aberth, , Criminal Churchmen , 29.Google Scholar
39 Aberth incorrectly translates this phrase, “containing things improper and shameful, not at all commending of scripture.” Google Scholar
40 Salzmann followed expectation, writing that the bishop “admonished the prior, at whose bedhead it had been found, Robert of Corby, the cellarer, who took it away and circulated it, and all who read it” (VCH Cambs , 2:215). This is somewhat different from what the text says.Google Scholar
41 Smith, and London, (The Heads of Religious Houses [n. 11 above], 2:96) have overlooked the references in the visitation to John of Chatteris as prior in 1345 and in the report of the election to John of Whittelsey as prior in 1347. The editors record, however, that a John of Chatteris occurs as prior on 30 December 1364 (BL MS Harley 3658, fol. 21v). If they are the same person, he would have resumed office after an interval.Google Scholar