POOR CLERKS' PROVISIONS: A CASE FOR REASSESSMENT?

GBPress- Gregorian Biblical Press

POOR CLERKS' PROVISIONS: A CASE FOR REASSESSMENT?Author(s): PETER McDONALDSource: Archivum Historiae Pontificiae, Vol. 30 (1992), pp. 339-349Published by: GBPress- Gregorian Biblical PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23564578 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 08:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

GBPress- Gregorian Biblical Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toArchivum Historiae Pontificiae.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.134 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:11:26 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=gbpress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23564578?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


PETER McDONALD

POOR CLERKS' PROVISIONS: A CASE FOR REASSESSMENT?

Summarium. — Diplomaticae pontificiae periti existimaverunt provisionum gratias expectativas in forma pauperum clericis pauperibus concessas plerumque effectu caruisse. Tales

provisiones numerosissimae expediebantur, sed paucas de iis notitias habemus, quia in registris pontificiis non referebantur et perpauca alia indicia in fontibus curiae romanae exstant. Registra vero episcoporurn Angliae e prima medietate saeculi XIV, id est, ex ilio tempore quo provisiones celerrime multiplicatae sunt, iudicia de his expectativis usu recepta in dubium vocant. Perlustratio registrorum episcoporurn typis editorum manifestum reddit executionem istarum

provisionum modo sat insigni prosecutam esse atque episcopos munere suo fungendi conatus

fecisse, cum executores prò provisionibus clericorum pauperum ad beneficia a domibus religiosis suarum dioecesium oblata designarent. In registris episcoporurn ex annis inter 1305 et 1325

publici iuris factis de 247 expectativis in forma pauperum notitiae habentur, e quibus saltem 49 omni cum probabilitate ad assecutionem beneficii perduxerunt. Inde dare probatur provisiones clericorum pauperum non ita inutiles fuisse sicut a doctis saepius affirmari solebat*.

The growing intervention of the papacy in clérical appointments in the fourteenth

century provided fertile ground for controversy In England, vehement proteste by

king and commons, complaining that 'ius patronatus... enervatur'2, led finally to the

Statute of Provisors in 13513. The attention of scholars who have studied provisions

has usually focussed on major bénéfices such as bishoprics, deaneries, the lucrative

prebends of cathedral and collegiate churches, and the wealthy rectories collated directly

by the popes because they fell into one of the catégories of reserved bénéfices vacant in

Curia. But the great majority of papal provisions were expectative grâces, which gave the récipient the right to the next vacant benefice in the gift of a designated patron. The

more valuable of these, expectatives in forma speciali, were letters of grace entered in

the papal registers4. Expectatives in forma pauperum or in forma comuni, for, 'poor

* Abbreviations used in foot-notes: CPL = Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers Relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Papal

Letters, II: 1305-1342, ed. W. H. Buss, London 1895; Ili: 1342-1362, ed. W.H. Buss and C. Johnson, London 1897.

CPP = Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers Relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Papal Pétitions, I: 1342-1419, ed. W.H. Bliss, London 1896.

1 On the system of papal provisions, see esp. G. Barraclough, Papal Provisions, Oxford

1935, and G. Mollat, La collation des bénéfices ecclésiastiques au temps des papes d'Avignon, Paris 1921.

2 Adam Murimuth, Continuatio Chronicarum, ed. E. M. Thompson (Rolls Sériés, CXCIII), London 1889, 144.

3 See W. A. Pantin, The English Church in the Fourteenth Century, Cambridge 1955, 81-87; G. Mollat, The Popes at Avignon, London 1963, 257-268; J. Haller, Papsttum und Kirchen

reform, Berlin 1903, 404-465, and P. Heath, Church and Realm, 1272-1461, London 1988, 128

132, for an account of these developments. 4 G. Mollat, Les grâces expectatives du XIIe au XIVe siècle: Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique

42 (1947) 81-102.



340 PETER McDONALD

clerks', carried less weight. Granted to unbeneficed clergy for bénéfices of restricted

value — less than twenty marks sterling or équivalent — they were classed as letters of

justice and so not entered in the papal registers5. Thus we have no accurate idea of

their number, but it is generally believed to have been large, particularly at the

inauguration of a new pontificate. One account would have it that 100,000 petitioners flocked to the court of Clement VI in 13426.

However uncertain scholars have been about the numbers of poor clerks'

provisions, they have had litde doubt about their value to unbeneficed clergy. The

standard treatment of the subject concludes, from the large numbers of these provisions and the lack of evidence of their implementation, that they had "peu d'efficacité

réelle"7. This judgment has been widely followed8. Yet the complaints of patrons, even if somewhat exaggerated and self-serving, suggest that provisions were more

widespread and effective than the relatively small number of direct collations of vacant

bénéfices9 would imply. This impression is borne out by the English episcopal registers ffom the first half of

the fourteenth century, the years when the provisions system developed most rapidly and provoked the parliamentary backlash that culminated in the Statute of Provisors.

Given the scantiness of papal documents, the episcopal registers prove to be an

unexpectedly fertile source of information on certain types of expectatives in forma

pauperum. Where a poor clerk's provision was made against an ecclesiastical patron other than the bishop or his chapter —

mostiy, in other words, a religious house — the

bishop was appointed sole executor10, and so executorial documents found their way into

the registers. (With expectatives in forma speciali, by contrast, the pope usually named

two or three non-episcopal executors, so that the fate of these provisions becomes difficult

to trace). In this paper, I shall take as a sample the evidence on poor clerks' provisions

against the patronage of English religious houses in published episcopal registers

covering the years from the accession of Clement V in 1305 to the death of Clement VI in

1352. This is admittedly a random sample, but an extensive one, covering at some point 14 of the 17 English dioceses, for an average of 26.4 years each", and dealing

5 C. TlHON, Les expectatives in forma pauperum, particulièrement au XIVe siècle: Bulletin de l'Institut historique Belge de Rome 5 (1925) 51-118.

6 E. Baluze, Vitae Paparum Avenionensium, ed. G. Mollat, I, Paris 1914, 298. 7

Tihon, Les expectatives, 94. 8 E. g. F. Baix, De la valeur historique des actes de collation pontificales, in Hommage à

Dom Ursmer Berlière, Brussels 1931, 58-59; L. Caillet, La Papauté d'Avignon et l'Eglise de France, Paris 1975, 29; B. Guillemain, La politique bénéficiale de Benoît XII, Paris 1952, 14; J. R. Wright, The Church and the English Crown, 1305-1334, Toronto 1980, 23; R. N. Swanson, Titles to orders in medieval English episcopal registers, in Studies in Medieval History Presented to R.H.C. Davis, ed. H. Mary-Harting & R. I. Moore, London 1985, 236-237.

' Cf. e.g. Pantin, English Church (as note 3), 58-65. 10

Tihon, Les expectatives (as note 5), 82-83. "

Episcopal registers, like the records of the royal administration, developed earlier in England than in most other parts of Europe, with the exception of the papal chancery itself. See D. M. Smith, Guide to Bishops' Registers of England and Wales, London 1981; C. R. Cheney, English Bishops' Chanceries, 1110-1250, Manchester 1950, esp. 100-110; M.T. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record: England 1066-1307, London 1979, 53-55. The dioceses covered in this study and the applicable dates are; Bath and Wells, 1309-52; Canterbury, 1305-13; Carlisle, 1305-24; Coventry and Lichfield, 1322-52; Durham, 1311-16, 1333-45 (fragments only); Ely 1337-52; Exeter, 1307-52; Hereford, 1317-52; London, 1304-38 (fragmentary); Rochester, 1319-52; Salisbury, 1305-30; Winchester, 1305-23; Worcester, 1308-13, 1317-27, 1339-49; York, 1306-15, 1317-40 (Richmond, Cleveland, Howdenshire and Allertonshire sections of register only). Bibliographical détails of these registers are given in the appendix.



POOR CLERKS' PROVISIONS 341

with between a third and a half of the parish churches in any diocese12. Though

incomplete, this sample would seem sufficient to illustrate general trends; and in any

case, comprehensive statistics will never be possible because we cannot know how

many expectatives in forma pauperum issued from the papal eh ance ry.

Papal sources do give some incidental information about poor clerks' provisions in

the period under review. Various papal lettere mention some fìfteen provisions to poor

clerks, one from the time of Clement V13, three under John XXII14, and eleven under

Clement VI15. Most of these references occur in non obstante clauses in other

provisions, suggesting that the original provisions were stili unfulfìlled; under Clement

VI, four providees had been waiting nine years or more. Sometimes the registers

explain why the earlier provisions failed. In 1310 Clement restored to Water Woolpit his rights from a provision in forma pauperum against the Augustinian priory of West

Acre (Norfolk), which he had renounced in return for a pension which the prior and

convent had not paid16. A complicated case arose under Bishop Grandisson of Exeter.

He refused to confer the vacant church of Lostwithiel (Cornwall) on Gregory Redruth,

who claimed it in virtue of an expectative in forma pauperum granted by Clement VI

for a benefice in the gift of the Augustinian priory of Bodmin17, and Gregory appealed

to the pope. While the case was before a papal auditor, Gregory heard that the bishop

had instituted William Jaune to the church. He lodged a further appeal, but died at the

Curia while it was in progress. Two clerks obtained surrogations to Gregory's rights, with no more success18. But ali was not gloom: the papal registers do contain

references to successful poor clerks' provisionsl9. These stray references aside, we must now turn to the executorial procedure in the

episcopal registers for a more systematic treatment. The most common document is the

commission to a sub-delegate. In the published episcopal registers alone, there are

approximately 116 cases of episcopal délégation of poor clerks' expectatives for

bénéfices in the gift of English religious houses20.

12 Precise figures on ecclesiastical patronage are unavailable. I have adduced some evidence for the foregoing approximation of the proportion of churches in monastic patronage in P.

McDonald, The Relations between the Papacy and. the Religious Orders in England, 1305 1352, unpublished D. Phil. thesis, University of Oxford, 1984, 281-283. See also D. M. Owen, Church and Society in Medieval Lincolnshire, Lincoln 1971, 73-74, and The Sede Vacante

Register of Worcester, ed. J. W. Wilus-Bund (Worcestershire Historical Society, XIV), Oxford

1897, pp. cxi seq. 13 CPL II, 74. 14 CPL, II, 172, 360. 15 CPL, III, 90; CCP I, 61; CPL, III, 104; CPP, I, 106; CPP, I, 128; CPL, III, 242; CPP, I, 132;

CPP, I, 148; CPL, III, 425; CPL, III, 425, 426, 432, 470. 16 CPL, II, 74; Regestum Clementis Papae V, V, Rome 1888, 248, n. 5943. 17 CPP, I, 128; CPL, III, 242. 18

CPL, III, 242, 433. 19 Lettres communes de Jean XXII, ed. G. Mollat, XI, Paris 1931, 105, n. 55982; The

Register of John de Grandisson, Bishop of Exeter (A. D. 1327-1369), ed. F.C. Hingeston

Randolph, I, London & Exeter 1894, 39; CPL, III, 239, 426, 432; Taxatio Ecclesiastica Angliae et

Walliae, ed. F. Castle et al., London 1802, 78; Victoria History of the Count of Norfolk, II, Lon

don 1906, 352. The records of the apostolic camera provide no information on successful poor clerks' provisions because clergy who acquired bénéfices through them were exempt frorn annates

until 1376; Mollat, La collation (as note 1), 49, n. 145; W.E. Lunt, Financial Relations of the

Papacy with England, 1327-1534, Cambridge, MA, 1962, 323; J. P. Kirsch, Die pàpstlichen Annaten in Deutschland, I, Paderborn 1903, 186.

20 The numbers in each diocese (which are as much a reflection of the survival, completeness and state of publication of the registers as of the actual situation) are: Bath and Wells, 21;



342 PETER McDONALD

Several of the episcopal documents give détails on the work of the executor or his

delegate21. Enquiry was to be had of clergy and laity from the clerk's place of origin and his accustomed places of conversation; it was to canvass whether he was of free and

legitimate birth and suitable and honest in conversation, whether he held any benefice,

whether there were any canonical obstacles to his promotion, and such other matters as

the commissary thought fit. The religious house against which the provision was made

was to be cited to appear and state its interests and to show cause, if any, why the

provision should not proceed. The process was also to be notified to ali other parties

likely to have an interest in it.

The dates at which these commissions occur cast some light on the workings of the

provisions system. The commissions themselves were concentrated around the start of

each pontificate, when the provisions were mostly issued. Most of the proceedings,

however, are spread more evenly, since the providee might not présent himself to the

executor for some time. Delays of six or seven years were common. Robert Freeman of

Stoke Edith, a poor priest of the diocese of Hereford, was ordained priest to the title of

his provision of a benefice from the priory of Llantony Prima (Monmouthshire) in

September 134822; but it is not until July 1353 that one finds even a commission to

execute23. The proportion of cases in which the exécution went beyond the mere act of

délégation cann ot, of course, be determined. It would be rash indeed to expect that ali

were fully executed, but many commissions suggest that some activity did follow.

In nine documented cases, the bishop exercised his office of executor directly24. Ali

except one of these cases occur between 1306 and 1310 — in other words, before the

rush of provisions in the fourteenth century had begun in earnest, and while the

volume of business was stili small enough for the bishops to attend to it themselves.

Most of the entries consist of the letters sent by the bishop-executor to the patron,

comprising four parts: the notificatio, informing the patron of the receipt of the papal letters and the satisfactoiy result of the enquiry into the providee's life and character; the inhibitio, in which the patrons were forbidden to assign a suitable benefice in the

diocese to anyone else until they had satisfied the providee; the reservatio, by which

the executor reserved the next vacant benefice in the patron's gift, should none be

Exeter, 9; Hereford, 22; London, 1; Rochester, 7; Salisbury, 1; Winchester, 6; Worcester, 13; York, 27; Ely, 8. Cambridge University Library, MS Ee 4 20, fo 42, contains a commission of 1342 from Bishop Stratford of London, whose register is now lost, ordering the archdeacon of Colchester to execute an expectative in forma pauperum for a benefice in the gift of St Albans abbey, and a summons front the archdeacon to the abbey to attend the prescribed inquiry into the candidate's life. Few monastic cartularies preserve such ephemeral documents about churches in the house's patronage.

21 Registrum Radulphi Baldock, Gilberti Segrave, Ricardi Newport et Stephani Gravesend,

episcoporum Londoniensium, A.D. MCCCIV-MCCCXXXVili, ed. R.C. Fowler (Canterbury & York Society, VII), London 1911, 123-124; The Register of William Greenfield, Lord Archbishop of York, 1306-15, ed. A. H. Thompson, 5 vols. (Surtees Society, CXLV, CXLIX, CLI, CLII, CLIII), London, 1931-40, II, 79; Register of John de Grandisson (as note 19), I, 430.

22 Registrum Johannis de Trillek, episcopi Herefordensis, A. D. MCCCXLIV-MGCCLXI, ed.

J. H. Parry (Canterbury & York Society, Vili), London 1912, 374. 23

Registrum Johannis de Trillek, 182. 24

Registrum Episcoporum Londoniensium (as note 21), 2 (Waltham abbey); Registrum Henrici Woodlok, diocesis Wintoniensis, A.D. 1305-1316, ed. A.W. Goodman, I, (Canterbury & York Society, XLUI-XLTV), London 1940-41, I, 138-139 (Southwark priory), 150 (Mottisfont prioty), 151 (Chertsey abbey), 419 (Hyde abbey), 444 (Newark priory); Register of William Greenfield (as note 21), III, 1-2 (Moxby nunnety), V, 147-148 (Durham priory); The Register of Ralph of Shrewsbury, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1329-1363, ed. T. S. Holmes, I (Somerset Record Society, IX-X), London 1896, I, 247-248 (Muchelney abbey).




available at the time; and finally the mandatum, pronouncing nuli ali actions taken

against the provision25. At least in these cases, it seems that some serious effort was

made to put the papal rescript into effect.

Once the executors had begun to act, a prò vision to a poor clerk might stili be

thwarted. About fifteen such cases are documented in the published episcopal registers. A religious house might persuade the providee to renounce his claim. Thus John

Ludlow of Leominster renounced at Avignon in May 1319, in the lodgings of Bishop Orleton of Hereford, his claim on the church of Madley (Herefordshire) from his poor clerk's provision against Wenlock priory; Ludlow's renunciation included the

executorial proceedings and his lawsuit against M. William Russel of Fownhope, the

priory's presentee whom Orleton had instituted. Ludlow reserved his right of provision to the next duly vacant benefice, and was rewarded until then with a yearly pension of

forty shillings26. Walter Reynolds, as bishop of Worcester, was involved in 1311 in a

similar transaction when John Dodswell, poor clerk, renounced his claim to the vicarage of St Peter's Stanway (Gloucestershire), in return for a yearly pension of forty shillings from the patrons, the abbot and convent of Tewkesbury, until they should provide him

with a suitable benefice; on the same day, the abbey's presentee, John Draycote, was

instituted to the vicarage27. The Cistercian abbey of Meaux similarly disposed in 1310

of an unbeneficed chaplain's claim to Naffreton, a church in its patronage, by awarding him a pension of forty shillings28.

Another recourse available to a monastery was to appeal at law against the

provision or the acts of the executors. This might be a simple matter of pointing out

that the benefice sought was not legally available for provision29. The house might also

appeal against allegedly arbitrary or unfair proceedings by the commissaries. Two

remarkably similar appeals (possibly using a common form) were lodged with their

respective ordinaries by the Benedictine abbey of Milton (Dorset) in 131730, and the

alien priory of Cowick (Devon) in 132931. In both cases, it was alleged that the

sub-executor was acting in collusion with the providee, summoning the religious to a

distant and unknown place, refusing to provide the house with a copy of the papal

rescript, his own commission and other documents as he ought, and allowing too short

a time for the religious to prepare their response; in the case concerning Cowick priory, the prior and convent had not even been allowed to put their case against the witnesses

produced by the providee. In both cases, the bishop resumed the judgment and

exécution of the provision and summoned the sub-executor and the providee to account

25 Registrum Episcoporum Londoniensium, 2-3, & Registrum Henrici Woodlock I, 138-139,

150-151, 419. On the duties and powers of the executor, see G. Barraclough, The executors of papal provisions in the canonical theory of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, In Ada

Congressus Iuridici Internationalis Romae 1934, III, Rome 1936, 104-153. 26

Registrum Ade de Orleton, episcopi Herefordensis, A. D. MCCCXVII-MCCCXXVII, ed. A. T. Bannister (Canterbury & York Society, V), London 1908, 110, 113-115.

27 The Register of Walter Reynolds, Bishop of Worcester, 1308-1313, ed. R. A. Wilson

(Worcestershire Historical Society, XXXIX), Oxford 1927, 32-33, 38-39. 28 Chronica Monasterii de Melsa, ed. E. A. Bond, II, (Rolls Sériés, XLIII), London 1867,

232. 29 E. g. Registrum Henrici Woodlock (as note 24), II, 681; The Register of Roger Martival,

bishop of Salisbury 1315-1330, ed. K. Edwards et al., (Canterbury & York Society, LV-LIV,

LXVIII), London 1959-75, I, 338-339, 345. In both these cases, the rectories claimed by the

provisors were appropriated to the monastery. 30

Register of Roger Martival, IV, 8-9, 219. 31

Register of John de Grandisson (as note 19), I, 453-454.



344 PETER McDONALD

for themselves32. The Augustinian priory of Newburgh in Yorkshire claimed in 1335

that the prior of Holy Trinity York, one of the archbishop of York's sub-executors in

the provision of William Couper of Aislaby, was unable to act because he was

excommunicate. Archbishop Melton responded by appointing new sub-executors33.

The patron might also challenge the suitability of the candidate. When Bishop Orleton committed to Adam Carbonel, canon of Hereford, the exécution of John

Brown's provision in his diocese against the Norman abbey of Cormeilles, the abbot

and convent impugned Brown's character. They alleged that Brown was excom

municate, had fraudulently procured ordination withouth proper title and was known

to be living in an adulterous and incestuous relationship with one Agnes Cotton, 'quo

tacito, quod si fuerit expressum, dominus papa hujusmondi rescriptum minime

concessisset'. The monks also complained that Adam Carbonel had been too brief and

peremptoiy in his hearing of the case34.

A providee might find his way blocked by the previous institution, or simple de

facto possession, of another. John Friboys, for example, had a poor clerk's provision of a benefice in the gift of Whitby abbey. On trying to obtain the rectory of

Skirpenbeck (East Yorkshire), he found the church occupied by Robert Blunsdon,

whom Archbishop Greenfield had (quite legally) presented by a papal faculty to

provide for his own clerks35. In 1311, Greenfield committed to his dean and

chancellor a case where the church of 'Cortelingstoke', claimed by Robert Richard of

Eryum on Tees in virtue of his expectation from Lenton priory, was found to be

occupied by John Langton36. In the 1340s we find Bishop Richard de Bury of

Durham, the executor, upholding another candidate in the face of a provision. Bury

appointed delegates to execute Philip Kilnsea's provision against the Augustinian

priory of Kirkham (East Yorkshire) in October 1343 Next May, he ordered the

citation of Philip as an intruder ' absque quocumque juris titulo', in the vicarage of

Newton in Glendale to which Bury himself had instituted William Wartre on Kirkham

priory's présentation38. Wartre's institution and induction took place in September, without any reference to this suit39.

Even a protracted conflict need not been unsuccessful, however. William Tydirlegh first obtained a poor clerk's provision of a benefice in the gift of Glastonbury abbey in

January 1344 40. He finally obtained the church of 'Bodeclye' (PBagley, Somerset) by his provision in August 1351, after an appeal to the pope against a claimant instituted

by the bishop of Bath and Wells41.

32 For other cases, see The Register of Thomas de Cobham, Bishop of Worcester, 1317-1327, ed. E. H. Pearce (Worcestershire Historical Society, XL), Oxford 1930, 16, 17, 74; Register of Walter Reynolds (as note 27), 19-20.

33 The Register of William Melton, Archbishop of York, 1317-1340, ed. R.M.T. Hill & D. Robinson (Canterbury & York Society, LXX-LXXIII to date), London 1978-88, II, 139-141.

34 Registrum Ade de Orleton (as note 26), 71-73. Appeal to the implied purity of the pope's

intentions was recognised in canon law; cf. Barraclough, Executors (as note 25), 142. 35

Register of William Greenfield (as note 21), III, 78. 36

Register of William Greenfield, IV, 114. 37 Richard d'Aungerville de Bury: fragments of his register and other documents, ed. G. W.

Kitchin (Surtees Society, CXIX), London 1910, 40. 38 Richard d'Aungerville de Bury, 59-62. 39

Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense, ed. T. D. Hardy, III (Rolls Sériés, LXII), London 1875, 473-474.

40 CPP, I, 46; cf. CPP, I, 41; CPL, III, 122.

41 Register of Ralph of Shrewsbury (as note 24), II, 667-668, 677.




Nor was William's success unique. For ali the negative evidence we have adduced

and the dismissive views of most scholars, the published episcopal registers Elione

contain 49 cases where poor clerks succeeded in obtaining bénéfices through their

provisions42 — a ratio of nearly one induction for every two recorded executorial

commissions. Many more successful provisions could well be contained in unpublished

registers. The distribution of the successful provisions is far from even. Fourteen of them

were in the diocese of Bath and Wells, and 23 in the diocese of Exeter, accounting between them for over four fifths of the total. Moreover, 33 were executed after

1342 — almost three quarters. The rising number of provisions under Clement VI

may account in part for this, and the Black Death almost certainly explains the

exécution of thirteen provisions — the largest number for any single year

— in

1349. Both the location and the numbers of successful provisions point to the

importance of the executor, coinciding as they do with the episcopates of John

Grandisson at Exeter and Ralph Shrewsbury at Bath and Wells. The good will of a

zealous executor seems to have been the surest guarantee that a provision would

stick. In other dioceses, the numbers are somewhat sparser: four institutions under

Archbishop Greenfield at York (1305-16); four in the diocese of Worcester for the

years 1307-13, 1317-27, and 1339-49, for which the registers are printed; and one in

the register of Henry Woodlok of Winchester (1305-16). The patronage of both

large and small religious houses was touched, but only the larger houses — St

Augustine's Bristol in the diocese of Bath and Wells and Bodmin in the diocese of

Exeter — had more than one or two provisions executed against their patronage.

So, on the face of it, complaints about the 'destruction' of patronage contained a

good deal of hyperbole. As might be expected, the bénéfices obtained were modest in character.

Twenty-eight were perpetuai vicarages, none of which seems to have been of great value. One poor clerk obtained a prebend in the tiny collegiate church of St Endellion,

Cornwall43. Usually, it was the providee who drew the executor's attention to the

vacancy of the benefice. Roger Hammond thus informed Bishop Woodlock of

Winchester in 1307 that the vicarage of Portsmouth, in the présentation of the

Augustinian priory of Southwick, had become vacant, whereupon the bishop commissioned the usuai enquiries in the ruridecanal chapter of Droxford44. Similarly John Brancoys notified Grandisson in 1339 of the vacancy of the vicarage of St Wenn in

Cornwall and made his acceptatio·, the bishop then duly approved the acceptatio and

ordered Brancoys' induction by commissaries45.

42 Registrum Henrici Woodlock (as note 24), I, 225-6; Register of John de Grandisson (as

note 19), II, 896-897, 954-955, 987; Ili, 1315, 1316, 1323, 1329, 1331, 1348, 1352, 1361 1368, 1370, 1374, 1375, 1376, 1395; Register of William Greenfield (as note 21), II, 20, III, 215, IV, 214, V, 178: Register of Thomas Cobham (as note 32), 12, 17; Calendar of the Register of Wolstan de Bransford, Bishop of Worcester, 1339-1349, ed. R. M. Haines (Worcestershire Historical Society, n.s., IV), Oxford 1966, 36, 352-353; Register of Ralph of Shrewsbury (as note

24), II, 465, 474, 494, 517, 520, 525, 529, 548-549, 559, 562-563, 564; Ely Diocesan

Remembrancer, July-August 1892, 760, December-January 1892-3, 844. 43

Register of John de Grandisson (as note 19), II, 954-955. 44

Registrum Henrici Woodlock (as note 24), I, 225-226. 45

Register of John de Grandisson, II, 896-897, 954-955, 987, III, 1323; for further examples, see Register of Thomas Cobham (as note 32), 12, 17; Register of William Greenfield (as note 21), II, 20.



346 PETER McDONALD

At first sight, the level of activity occasioned by expectatives in forma pauperum seems surprisingly high. From the material discussed above, some 197 expectatives in

forma pauperum have come to light. In addition, papal provisions in forma pauperum

provided the title for ordination for over 60 clerks whose names appear in ordination

lists46. This use of provisions seems mostly to have been confìned to the West Country

dioceses, especially Hereford. Including these additional provisions, we reach a total of

257 expectatives in forma pauperum issued against the patronage of English religious houses — and this only from the incomplete and random sélection of bishops' registers so far published.

What proportion these were of the total number of expectatives issued, and how

many apart from the 49 we have discovered led to bénéfices, must yet remain

unanswered questions. Other institutions to bénéfices in monastic patronage may have

escaped notice because the acts of the sub-executors delegated by the bishop are no

longer preserved. Records of poor clerks' provisions to bénéfices in episcopal or

capitular patronage, no doubt many, have disappeared with the acta of their

non-episcopal executors. Not ali episcopal registers were comprehensive records of a

bishop's acts, and the stili unpublished registers, which cover some of the larger dioceses such as Lincoln, could well confimi the picture of an unexpectedly high level of

activity we have sketched here. The unpublished Lincoln registers, for example,

reportedly contain sub-executorial commissions for 403 poor clerks' provisions between

1335 and 134747.

Stili, even the random and incomplete sarnple we have surveyed here suffices to

cali into question the conventional judgements on the uselessness of poor clerks' grâces. It would be idle, of course, to deny the evidence of long and futile periods of waiting on

the pari of poor clerks, and the large numbers of their provisions which seem to have

disappeared without trace. The level of activity was probably modest, and statistical

précision will never be possible. But to state that "le caractère le plus souvent

platonique de cette sorte d'expectatives nous permet de ne point trop regretter

l'impossibilité du calcul" 48 is surely to exaggerate. Such highly negative conclusions

have been formulated mainly by continental scholars, working without the benefit of

the episcopal registers, which have survived extensively only in England and provide a

unique insight into the workings of the provisory system. These registers show that

poor clerk's provisions, however modest their rate of success, were not wholly worthless.

Moreover, the number of poor clerks' provisions for which we cannot establish a

successful exécution should be treated with caution. As we have seen, patrons had their

ways of dealing with particularly unwanted provisions, including buying off the

providee with a pension; in those cases at least, the poor clerk gained some benefit from his provision. Providees sometimes declined to prosecute their provisions or

accept bénéfices — perhaps because a chantry priest or chaplain could often do as well

financially in a position without the cure of soûls as he would in a poorly endowed

46 Registrum Thome Charlton, episcopi Herefordensis, A. D. MCCCXXV11 -MCCCXIJV, ed.

W.W. Capes (Canterbury & York Society, IX), London 1913, 102, 104, 106, 111, 117, 123, 159, 162, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 172, 173, 176, 180, 196; Registrum Johannis de Trillek (as note 22), 418, 427, 429, 459, 468; Registrum Hertrici Woodlock (as note 24), II, 860; Register of Thomas Cobham (as note 32), 60, 67, 79, 82, 123, 141, 142, 148, 195.

47 Lunt, Financial Relations 1327-1534 (as note 19), 324-325; D. Robinson, Beneficed Clergy

in Cleveland and the East Riding, 1306-40, York 1969, 24-25. 48

Guillemain, Politique bénéficiale (as note 8), 14.




benefi.ee49. Provision, moreover, was only one weapon in even a poor clerk's armoury. The case of John Friboys of the diocese of York may serve as an example. Having failed

in 1308 to get the church of Skirpenbeck, he renounced in 1314 the effect of his

provision against Whitby abbey50. Ordained in September 1314 with a title from the

Augustinian abbot and convent of Thornton51, he was institued in February 1315 to a

benefice in the archbishop's collation52. Similar cases, where a provision was

abandoned because preferment came from elsewhere, were probably commonplace. Unbenefìced clergy with the connexions and knowledge necessary to get a supplication

through the papal chancery would have stood a better chance of attracting the favour of

an ecclesiastical or lay patron than would their less fortunate or astute colleagues.

Moreover, a monastery which had bought off a providee with a pension would

naturally wish to unload its obligation as soon as possible onto the tithe-payers of one

of its parishes. So poor clerks' provisions, though not so ineffective as often thought, probably

wrought little change, of themselves, in the ranks of the clergy. Certainly, the notion

that they were an attempi by an ambitious papal court to create a "véritable clérical

prolétariat" of unbenefìced clergy subservient to its interests53 will not stand. On the

contrary, 'poor clerks' provisions had their origin in attempts to counter irresponsible

ordinations by local bishops without proper title54. As we have seen, they were not

widely used as titles for ordination. Most unbenefìced clergy were ordained with titles

furnished either by their patrimonial revenues or by pensions from religious houses,

probably acting as trustées of patrimonial settlements and examining the ordinands,

and perhaps employing a few of them as chantry priests or clerks55. Recent research

suggests that the growth in the ranks of unbenefìced clergy in later medieval England

was mainly a conséquence of growing lay demands for their services as chaplains,

schoolmasters and chantry priests56. These local connexions serve to remind us that many of the poor clerks would

already have links with the religious houses against whose patronage they received

provisions. The same might also apply to those who got expectatives against episcopal

patronage, some at least of whom were anything but destitute; Elias Joneston,

49 Cf. the case where Bishop Martival of Salisbury instituted the presentee of the nuns of

Shaftesbury to the church of Broughton Gifford (Wiltshire) after he established that neither of the two clerks holding expectatives against the convent wanted to claim it; Register of Roger Martival

(as note 29), I, 369-370. On the relative prosperity of chantry priests and the incumbents of well

paid bénéfices, see K. L. Wood-Legh, Studies in Church Life in England under Edward III,

Cambridge 1934, 122. 50

Supra, p. 344. Register of William Greenfield (as note 21), III, 78, 258-60. 51

Register of William Greenfield, III, 227. (The reference is to a pension from the priory, not a provision).

52 Register of William Greenfield, III, 102.

53 Urkunden und Regesten zur Geschichte der Rheinlande aus dem Vatikanischen Archiv, ed. H.V. Sauerland, III, Bonn 1905, p. lviii.

54 Tihon, Les expectatives (as note 5), 53-54. 55 Cf. Registrum Henrici Woodlock (as note 24), I, p. XXXIV; Swanson, Titles to orders (as

note 8); P. Heath, The English Parish Clergy on the Eve of the Reformation, London 1968, 17,

21; A. H. Thompson, The English Clergy and their Organization in the Later Middle Ages, Oxford

1947, 142-143. 56 A. K. McHardy, Ecclesiastics and économies: poor priests, prosperous laymen and proud

prelates in the reign of Richard II: Studies in Church History 24 (1987) 129-137. On clérical

careers in England, see R. N. Swanson, Church and Society in Later Medieval England, Oxford

1989, 27-88.



348 PETER McDONALD

récipient of a poor clerk's provision from Clement V, was a royal clerk of some

importance ". Papal provisions were one of several interlocking patronage networks,

ali of which an ambitious clerk might exploit at once58. He might get a lay benefactor to

support his pétition at the Curia while leaning directly on the monastery of which the

layman was a patron or benefactor59. Indeed, while information on the sponsorship of

poor clerks' provisions is lacking, we cannot exclude the possibility that bishop, deans,

archdeacons and monasteries, through their curial proctors, sought provisions for clerks

whom they wished to promote anyway, in order to improve their chances60. Poor

clerks' provisions were by no means a plot to create a pro-papal clérical prolétariat

discontented with locai society; but by the sarne token the provisions system was too

deeply embedded in locai society to function as "the only effective check on the

dominance of strictly material class interests in the church"61 which some have

imagined.

APPENDIX

Bibliographical Détails of Published English Episcopal Registers Covering the Period 1305-1352

Bath and Wells: Calendar of the Register of John de Drokensford, Bishop of Bath and

Wells (A. D. 1309-1329), ed. E. Hobhouse (Somerset Record Society, I), London

1887; The Register of Ralph of Shrewsbury, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1329

1363, ed T. S. Holmes (Somerset Record Society, IX-X), London 1896.

Canterbury: Registrum Roberti Winchelsey Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi, ed. R.

Graham (Canterbuiy & York Society, LI-LII), London 1952-56.

Carlisle: The Register οf John de Halton, bishop of Carlise, A. D. 1292-1324, ed. W. N. Thompson (Canterbury & York Society, XII-XIII), London 1913.

Coventry and Lichfield: E. Hobhouse, The Register of Roger de Northbury, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry from A. D. 1322 to A. D. 1358: an abstract of contents and remarks, in Collections for a History of Staffordshire (William Sait Archaeo

logical Society, I), Stafford 1880.

Durham: Records of Antony Bek, bishop and patriarch, 1283-1311, ed. C.M. Fraser

(Surtees Society, CLXII), London 1953; Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense, ed. T. D. Hardy (Rolls Sériés, LXII), London 1875; Richard d'Aungerville de Bury: fragments of his register and other documents, ed. G.W. Kitchin (Surtees Society, CXIX), London 1910.

Ely: Registers of Simon Montacute and Thomas de Lisle, calendared by J.H. Crosby, in Ely Diocesan Remembrancer, 54-113 (November 1889-November 1914).

57 Wright, Church and the English Crown (as note 8), 22, n. 26. 58 For social pressures on ecclesiastical patronage, see Swanson, Church and Society, 50-82,

and for an illuminating case study, R. Donaldson, Sponsors, patrons and présentations to

bénéfices — particularly those in the gift of the priors of Durham — in the later Middle Ages: Archaeologia Aeliana, 4th ser., 38 (1960) 169-177.

59 On lay patrons' use of the advowsons of religious houses with which they were connected to reward their own clerks and advocates, see S. M. Wood, English Monasteries and Their Patrons in the Thirteenth Century, Oxford 1955, 112-113, 151-152.

60 Cf. McDonald, The Papacy and the Religious orders (as note 12), 347, 354-357. 61

Barraclough, Papal Provisions (as note 1), 61.




Exeter: The Register of Walter de Stapledon, Bishop of Exeter (A.D. 1307-1326), ed. F.C. Hingeston-Randolph, London & Exeter 1892; The Register of John de Gran

disson, Bishop of Exeter (A.D. 1327-1369), ed. F.C. Hingeston-Randolph, London

& Exeter 1894-99.

Hereford: Registrum Ricardi de Swinfield, episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MC

CLXXXIII-MCCCXVII, ed. W.W. Capes (Canterbury & York Society, VI), London

1909; Registrum Ade de Orleton, episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCCXVII

MCCCXXVII, ed. A.T. Bannister (Canterbury & York Society, V), London 1908;

Registrum Thome Charlton, episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCCXXVH

MCCCXLIV, ed. W.W. Capes (Canterbury & York Society, IX), London 1913;

Registrum Johannis de Trillek, episcopi Herefordensis, A.D. MCCCXLIV

MCCCLXI, ed. J.H. Parry (Canterbury & York Society, Vili), London, 1912.

London; Registrum Radulphi Baldock, Gilberti Segrave, Ricardi Newport et Stephani Gravesend, episcoporum Londoniensium, A.D. MCCCIV-MCCCXXXVIII, ed.

R.C. Fowler (Canterbury & York Society, VII), London 1911.

Rochester: Registrum Hamonis Hethe, diocesis Roffensis, A.D. 1319-1352, ed. C.

Johnson (Canterbury & York Society, XLVIII-XLIX), London 1948.

Salisbury: Registrum Simonis de Gandavo, diocesis Sareberiensis, A.D. 1297-1315, ed. C.T. Flower & M.C.B. Dawes (Canterbury & York Society, XL-XLI), London

1948; The Register of Roger Martival, bishop of Salisbury 1315-1330, ed. K.

Edwards et al. (Canterbury & York Society, LV-LIX, LXVIII), London 1959-75.

Winchester: Registrum Henrici Woodlock, diocesis Wintoniensis, A.D. 1305-1316, ed.

A.W. Goodman (Canterbury & York Society, XLIII-XLIV), London 1940-41; The

Registers of John de Sandale and Rigaud de Asserio, Bishops of Winchester

(A.D. 1316-1323), ed. F.J. Baigent, Winchester 1897.

Worcester: The Register of William de Geynesburgh, Bishop of Worcester, 1302-1307, ed. J.W. Wilus-Bund (Worcestershire Historical Society, XII), Oxford 1907-29; The Register of Walter Reynolds, Bishop of Worcester, 1308-1313, ed. R.A.

Wilson (Worcestershire Historical Society, XXXIX), Oxford 1927; The Register of Thomas de Cobham, Bishop of Worcester, 1317-1327, ed. E.H. Pearce (Worces tershire Historical Society, XL), Oxford 1930; Calendar of the Register of Adam

de Orleton, Bishop of Worcester, 1327-1333, ed. R.M. Haines (Worcestershire Historical Society /Historical Manuscripts Commission Joint Publication, XXVII), London 1980; Calendar of the Register of Woltstan de Bransford, Bishop of

Worcester, 1339-1349, ed. R.M. Haines (Worcestershire Historical Society, n.s.,

IV), Oxford 1966.

York: The Register of William Greenfield, Lord Archbishop of York, 1306-15, ed.

A.H. Thompson (Surtees Society, CXLV, CXLIX, CLI, CLII, CLIII), London 1931

40; The Register of William Melton, Archbishop of York, 1317-1340, ed. R.M.T.

Hill & D. Robinson (Canterbury & York Society, LXX-LXXIII to date), London

1978-88.



Documents

POOR CLERKS' PROVISIONS: A CASE FOR REASSESSMENT?